2007-12-22 10:52:58 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hmm. Let me see...
*clicks on another window for a few moments*
...Perhaps it's because Yahoo Answers is more about social networking than providing accurate information.
2007-12-22 12:01:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Merry Christmas!
http://www.californiamall.com/holidaytraditions/
2007-12-22 11:10:39 · answer #2 · answered by Buke 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nobody, except Jesus Himself, has a corner on the Truth. On wikipedia, it's basically an anonymous collection of things, but here, you can get a broad spectrum of ideas and opinions. Some give their sources, and/or a reference to what and why they believe.
Besides, isn't it more exciting here than wikipedia?
2007-12-22 11:32:42 · answer #3 · answered by Brother Jonathan 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i don't trust wikipedia for any answers. anyone can edit that stuff and i know a couple of jerks who edit in incorrect info just for fun. google what you want to and then pick a site strictly about the thing you're looking up. but, if it's not something you can just look up, go ahead and ask.
2007-12-22 10:57:46 · answer #4 · answered by halloweenie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1) Wikipedia isn't the most reliable place for information.
2) R & S is good for different opinions.
2007-12-22 10:55:49 · answer #5 · answered by Beletje_vos AM + VT 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The best R&S questions cannot be answered with anything other than an opinion.
Facts are boring. I want vitriolic opinion, dammit!
2007-12-22 10:58:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It would make 99.99% of the people asking look much less stupid. And frankly it would have come in really handy in your questions about agnostics
2007-12-22 11:01:10 · answer #7 · answered by tuyet n 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Either that or youtube videos. Apparently some people think those are all gospel, irrefutable, truth.
2007-12-22 10:55:44 · answer #8 · answered by Cheryl E 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋