what does firecrootch mean??!!?
922400
a redhead woman that has red pubic hair.
669830
I don't know, you tell me. I tried the search engine but it cries that i can't find what it means.
940632
The only fire fox I know of is a virus protector! Sorry!
915937
Pyro- for fire, as in pyrotecnician\nPoly- for many as in polytheism(belief in multiple gods.)
969140
It is not a very good word, and there is no direct translation. It is something like f**k or s**t, and usually used when you drop something or do something wrong.
1043733
Oh my God, I'm so glad you asked this question! I have a family of idiots living behind me. They don't talk redneck, but they act redneck. My mom's the landlord so I had to go in the day after they moved in to get them to sign the lease. The house was already TRASHED. Their kid is a destructive terror. I don't think the three of them combined have enough wattage to light a firefly's a$$.
561524
I don't know what this means??
288515
what the hell does that mean?
910173
Don't you hate it when that happens. Sounds like an old  windows operating system. Try it with out the Internet hooked up and disable the fire wall...
71724
What does that even mean??!!!!!
438393
Flammable, inflammable...\n\nEnglish is just weird.
362143
Though this is a typo kind of jargon, it means respond;Please reply,Call me back etc.Hope this helps
63854
They're the same.  Some people got confused by "inflammable," thinking the "in-" was a prefix meaning "not."  So they later truncated it to flammable to avoid confusion.\n\nilikethikchix is wrong.  Follow him and you'll get burnt.  Remember the Simpsons where Marge cut off Homer's thumb?  Dr Nick Burned down his office, saying, "Inflammable means flammable?"  The same can happen to you!!!
709187
i think - what ?%?^@^@$%R does that mean... wouldve searched for it online but hey, got plenty more questions to answer before the net gets jammed and slows down and all..\n\ncheers..
612104
The explanations of fire in most standard reference works, not to put too fine a point on it, suck. The Encyclopaedia Britannica, for example, takes the following ineffectual stab: "rapid burning of combustible material with the evolution of heat and usually accompanied by flame." No wonder people have lost faith in science. Time to let a professional show how it's done. We'll start by reviewing the defects of the EB definition.\n\n(1) Rapid burning. OK, fire burns rapidly. Slow combustion, also known as oxidation, includes such nonfiery processes as rusting and digestion. However, to say that fire involves burning is to embark on a circular definition: What is fire? When something burns. What is burning? When something is on fire. We need to address the matter in more basic terms.\n\n(2) Combustible materials. Redundant. If a material is capable of rapid burning, by definition it's combustible. Also, "materials" is needlessly vague. One specific material, oxygen, is always involved.\n\n(3) Evolution of heat. I don't know what this is supposed to mean either.\n\n(4) Usually accompanied by flame. "Usually accompanied by" my arse. Flame is the quintessential pyrolytic phenomenon, not a mere by-product.\n\nNow for a proper definition, devised by myself: "Fire is the rapid combination of oxygen with fuel in the presence of heat, typically characterized by flame, a body of incandescent gas that contains and sustains the reaction and emits light and heat." Let's go through this bit by bit:\n\n(1) Rapid combination of oxygen with fuel in the presence of heat. Oxygen, fuel, and heat are the essential ingredients of fire. \n\n(2) Typically characterized by flame. The pup qualifier "typically" allows me to sidestep the issue of apparently nonflaming fires, like you get with burning charcoal. I suspect charcoal fires do create flame--you just can't see it due to the lack of impurities or incompletely burned fuel in the plume. (You can't see a fuel fire at an Indy or CART race either, because the cars run on clean-burning methanol.) But that's a matter we can leave for another day.\n\n(3) Body of incandescent gas. Flame defined. Most encyclopedia and dictionary definitions blow past this entirely, allowing persons such as yourself to imagine that fire is "pure energy" or similar nonsense. We say "body" because the gas has a characteristic structure and composition. We say "incandescent" because (a) it sounds scientific, (b) it means "luminous with intense heat," precisely what we are attempting to convey, and (c) if the Teeming Millions are going to learn one vocabulary word today, by God "incandescent" should be it.\n\n(4) Contains and sustains the reaction. Flame isn't just the result of fire; it is the fire. What's more, without the flame's heat the fire would go out.\n\n(5) Emits light and heat. Duh. However, we mustn't overlook the obvious.  \n\n>>>why do things that are put in it come out totally destroyed?\n\nOf course most things that go into fire aren’t totally destroyed. Most metals, glass, ceramic and so forth all emerge unscathed from fire. Even wood and paper aren’t totally destroyed, they leave an ash and charcoal residue as well as fine particles that we can see as soot and smoke.\n\nFire will ‘destroy’ anything organic that can be completely oxidised at the temperature that it burns at, but that is simply because the oxidation process converts the organic material to carbon dioxide,  and water. IOW the material isn’t destroyed it is just converted to gas and that gas blows away.\n\n>>>>>what fuel does it need from say, paper,\n\nThe paper IS the fuel the fire needs. The fire converts the paper into gases and ash. Or more accurately fire is the process of converting paper into gases and ash.
949662
eh??? what does that mean?
386325
Spicy! Seriously, what does this mean?