I hate them...mostly because they block the new activity page..and also because if someone has to quote pages of the bible..maybe they just better learn it themselves so they can give a precis...Long quoted articles actually detract from their credibility.

1 Adam, Seth, Enosh, 2 Cainan,[a] Mahalalel, Jared, 3 Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, 4 Noah,[b] Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 5 The sons of Japheth were Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 6 The sons of Gomer were Ashkenaz, Diphath,[c] and Togarmah. 7 The sons of Javan were Elishah, Tarshishah,[d] Kittim, and Rodanim.[e] 8 The sons of Ham were Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Canaan. 9 The sons of Cush were Seba, Havilah, Sabta,[f] Raama,[g] and Sabtecha. The sons of Raama were Sheba and Dedan. 10 Cush begot Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one on the earth. 11 Mizraim begot Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, 12 Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom came the Philistines and the Caphtorim). 13 Canaan begot Sidon, his firstborn, and Heth; 14 the Jebusite, the Amorite, and the Girgashite; 15 the Hivite, the Arkite, and the Sinite; 16 the Arvadite, the Zemarite, and the Hamathite. 17 The sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, Aram, Uz, Hul, Gether, and Meshech.[h] 18 Arphaxad begot Shelah, and Shelah begot Eber. 19 To Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg,[i] for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan. 20 Joktan begot Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 21 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 22 Ebal,[j] Abimael, Sheba, 23 Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these were the sons of Joktan. 24 Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, 25 Eber, Peleg, Reu, 26 Serug, Nahor, Terah, 27 and Abram, who is Abraham. 28 The sons of Abraham were Isaac and Ishmael. The Family of Ishmael 29 These are their genealogies: The firstborn of Ishmael was Nebajoth; then Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, 30 Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad,[k] Tema, 31 Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah. These were the sons of Ishmael. The Family of Keturah 32 Now the sons born to Keturah, Abraham’s concubine, were Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. The sons of Jokshan were Sheba and Dedan. 33 The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah. The Family of Isaac 34 And Abraham begot Isaac. The sons of Isaac were Esau and Israel. 35 The sons of Esau were Eliphaz, Reuel, Jeush, Jaalam, and Korah. 36 And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zephi,[l] Gatam, and Kenaz; and by Timna,[m] Amalek. 37 The sons of Reuel were Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah. The Family of Seir 38 The sons of Seir were Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. 39 And the sons of Lotan were Hori and Homam; Lotan’s sister was Timna. 40 The sons of Shobal were Alian,[n] Manahath, Ebal, Shephi,[o] and Onam. The sons of Zibeon were Ajah and Anah. 41 The son of Anah was Dishon. The sons of Dishon were Hamran,[p] Eshban, Ithran, and Cheran. 42 The sons of Ezer were Bilhan, Zaavan, and Jaakan.[q] The sons of Dishan were Uz and Aran. The Kings of Edom 43 Now these were the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before a king reigned over the children of Israel: Bela the son of Beor, and the name of his city was Dinhabah. 44 And when Bela died, Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his place. 45 When Jobab died, Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his place. 46 And when Husham died, Hadad the son of Bedad, who attacked Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his place. The name of his city was Avith. 47 When Hadad died, Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place. 48 And when Samlah died, Saul of Rehoboth-by-the-River reigned in his place. 49 When Saul died, Baal-Hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his place. 50 And when Baal-Hanan died, Hadad[r] reigned in his place; and the name of his city was Pai.[s] His wife’s name was Mehetabel the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mezahab. 51 Hadad died also. And the chiefs of Edom were Chief Timnah, Chief Aliah,[t] Chief Jetheth, 52 Chief Aholibamah, Chief Elah, Chief Pinon, 53 Chief Kenaz, Chief Teman, Chief Mibzar, 54 Chief Magdiel, and Chief Iram. These were the chiefs of Edom. The Family of Israel 1 These were the sons of Israel: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, 2 Dan, Joseph, Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. From Judah to David 3 The sons of Judah were Er, Onan, and Shelah. These three were born to him by the daughter of Shua, the Canaanitess. Er, the firstborn of Judah, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; so He killed him. 4 And Tamar, his daughter-in-law, bore him Perez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five. 5 The sons of Perez were Hezron and Hamul. 6 The sons of Zerah were Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara—five of them in all. 7 The son of Carmi was Achar,[a] the troubler of Israel, who transgressed in the accursed thing. 8 The son of Ethan was Azariah. 9 Also the sons of Hezron who were born to him were Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai.[b] 10 Ram begot Amminadab, and Amminadab begot Nahshon, leader of the children of Judah; 11 Nahshon begot Salma,[c] and Salma begot Boaz; 12 Boaz begot Obed, and Obed begot Jesse; 13 Jesse begot Eliab his firstborn, Abinadab the second, Shimea[d] the third, 14 Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, 15 Ozem the sixth, and David the seventh. 16 Now their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah were Abishai, Joab, and Asahel—three. 17 Abigail bore Amasa; and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite.[e] The Family of Hezron 18 Caleb the son of Hezron had children by Azubah, his wife, and by Jerioth. Now these were her sons: Jesher, Shobab, and Ardon. 19 When Azubah died, Caleb took Ephrath[f] as his wife, who bore him Hur. 20 And Hur begot Uri, and Uri begot Bezalel. 21 Now afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir the father of Gilead, whom he married when he was sixty years old; and she bore him Segub. 22 Segub begot Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 (Geshur and Syria took from them the towns of Jair, with Kenath and its towns—sixty towns.) All these belonged to the sons of Machir the father of Gilead. 24 After Hezron died in Caleb Ephrathah, Hezron’s wife Abijah bore him Ashhur the father of Tekoa. The Family of Jerahmeel 25 The sons of Jerahmeel, the firstborn of Hezron, were Ram, the firstborn, and Bunah, Oren, Ozem, and Ahijah. 26 Jerahmeel had another wife, whose name was Atarah; she was the mother of Onam. 27 The sons of Ram, the firstborn of Jerahmeel, were Maaz, Jamin, and Eker. 28 The sons of Onam were Shammai and Jada. The sons of Shammai were Nadab and Abishur. 29 And the name of the wife of Abishur was Abihail, and she bore him Ahban and Molid. 30 The sons of Nadab were Seled and Appaim; Seled died without children. 31 The son of Appaim was Ishi, the son of Ishi was Sheshan, and Sheshan’s son was Ahlai. 32 The sons of Jada, the brother of Shammai, were Jether and Jonathan; Jether died without children. 33 The sons of Jonathan were Peleth and Zaza. These were the sons of Jerahmeel. 34 Now Sheshan had no sons, only daughters. And Sheshan had an Egyptian servant whose name was Jarha. 35 Sheshan gave his daughter to Jarha his servant as wife, and she bore him Attai. 36 Attai begot Nathan, and Nathan begot Zabad; 37 Zabad begot Ephlal, and Ephlal begot Obed; 38 Obed begot Jehu, and Jehu begot Azariah; 39 Azariah begot Helez, and Helez begot Eleasah; 40 Eleasah begot Sismai, and Sismai begot Shallum; 41 Shallum begot Jekamiah, and Jekamiah begot Elishama. The Family of Caleb 42 The descendants of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel were Mesha, his firstborn, who was the father of Ziph, and the sons of Mareshah the father of Hebron. 43 The sons of Hebron were Korah, Tappuah, Rekem, and Shema. 44 Shema begot Raham the father of Jorkoam, and Rekem begot Shammai. 45 And the son of Shammai was Maon, and Maon was the father of Beth Zur. 46 Ephah, Caleb’s concubine, bore Haran, Moza, and Gazez; and Haran begot Gazez. 47 And the sons of Jahdai were Regem, Jotham, Geshan, Pelet, Ephah, and Shaaph. 48 Maachah, Caleb’s concubine, bore Sheber and Tirhanah. 49 She also bore Shaaph the father of Madmannah, Sheva the father of Machbenah and the father of Gibea. And the daughter of Caleb was Achsah. 50 These were the descendants of Caleb: The sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, were Shobal the father of Kirjath Jearim, 51 Salma the father of Bethlehem, and Hareph the father of Beth Gader. 52 And Shobal the father of Kirjath Jearim had descendants: Haroeh, and half of the families of Manuhoth.[g] 53 The families of Kirjath Jearim were the Ithrites, the Puthites, the Shumathites, and the Mishraites. From these came the Zorathites and the Eshtaolites. 54 The sons of Salma were Bethlehem, the Netophathites, Atroth Beth Joab, half of the Manahethites, and the Zorites. 55 And the families of the scribes who dwelt at Jabez were the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and the Suchathites. These were the Kenites who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

I don't really mind it. As long as they let me be nonsensical they can be religiousal.

I don't mind it but I don't put much stock into answers like that. It makes me think that the person is narrow-minded. If someone just sprinkled a bible quote or two in with the rest of their answer that would be different though.

I do not mind them at all as long as the person who posts them does not mind me not reading them. :) The only problem I have is when they wear out my scrolling finger.

If I ask for a logical explanation for something, then it bothers me when the bible or any religion really is quoted at me. I'm sorry if that offends people, but to me there is nothing logical or scientific about religion or philosophy. They seem to be the opposite of one another. I really don't mean to offend anyone by that. I'm a very spiritual person myself. But there's a time and place for religion, and it isn't in most of my questions.

no not really ...I figure if they are dribbling crap to me their leaving someone else alone ...and I bite back!:):)

It only really pisses me off when I get a religious answer to a question that has nothing at all to do with religion. The Bible quotes often detract from their credibility because it shows how inconsiderate they are- as if the bible is the ultimate, unquestionable truth that will iron-back their argument, and that everyone is a bible-thumping christian. Which happens quite frequently, come to think of it.

I don't like it when anyone quotes the Bible at me, no matter what the reason. I mainly don't like this because they assume I care what the Bible has to say in the first place....

I definitely prefer not to get those. I have my own religion and do not need condescending messages.

Depends if it's useful to me.

I laugh and think of them madly cutting and pasting.

NO! As you can see below, I not only enjoy "getting" them, I also am party to giving them out, as well!! ENJOY! PROFESSORS: GIG’S & GENG’S WISDOM TIME AGAIN: EVOLUTION: Monkey-Ape Time Mrs Iva Tail To Tell (Dean of Makittup University) declared, "Our direct forefathers were gorillas. We straightened our backs and shortened our arms. The latter [or is that ladder?] meant we couldn't have such high shelves of course. But you can't have everything. Yes, we must have come from gorillas because they look more like us on the outside than anything else. That's obvious proof". "Yes", said Prof Gig (Professor in nuts bolts and screws of all kinds), "many years ago they used to talk about how intelligent dogs were, but now we say how intelligent gorillas are. Soon we will have research to prove that they are more intelligent than all other animals; if we can get someone to fund it". Mrs Soarit of Perth WA says, "I watched it on TV, how they put a monkey in a room with a box and put a banana on a string that he couldn't reach. The monkey worked out to move the box over and get onto it to get the banana. The only thing is I've seen a dog do the same thing years before". Dr Ivanew Mith (Vetinary Surgeon of Wefixit Clinic) said, "a gorillas stomach is very different from ours and many other parts. If we ate what a gorilla eats in a day (bamboo shoots) we would be dead. We are more like a horse in eating habits and can eat most things they do. Also we can eat most things birds eat. So horses or birds must be our closest relatives". Dr R E Movitt (Brain Surgeon of Qurem Hospital) said, "Talk is made of people having a so called "human" extra piece on our brains, that apes don't have, that makes us more intelligent. But there are many people who are born without this section as a deformity but it creates no thinking or action disability: The person is completely normal". Prof Gig stated in regard these things; "there are always facts we need to ignore in the pursuit of theoretical science and funding. In this case quite a lot of facts. But then we also get a lot of funding here, as it's a popular theory". Miss Itneedsta Makesens commented, "even if we found a group of monkeys that once wrote their history it still wouldn't prove that apes changed into man. All it would prove is that we found an intelligent group of apes. And anyone with any imagination could come up with another theory of our existence that would sound far more realistic than apes changing into people _ or at least equally as irrational". Why didn't I evolve into a human so that nothing would step on me? Evolution Dr F Roard (Phd., DOB, FBI, KGB, MIA, POT) said, "things all changed by deformities that survived and got passed on. So we believe that something as complex as an eye just happened by chance. Over MILLIONS of years, of course. It makes it sound more believable when we say that because no one can conceive millions of years. So each deformity that went into making an eye was passed on to the next generation. Now I know what you are thinking. You are wondering why we can't seem to find loads of animals, insects or people existing today with only partly formed eyes. Yes, it is true that there would need to be countless masses of them, for the working eye to exist on such a large scale. Particularly considering the seemingly endless intermediate steps and those who would have therefore failed to evolve the rest of the eye correctly by chance. We try to ignore these facts in the interest of 'truth'. And the theory is popular." Professor Messa of the Institute for Lost Scientists said, "We believe the other theory where evolution happened because things decided that they needed to change for their environment. Animals also did this. A lizard decided that it wasn't safe or getting enough food on the ground so it thought about the problem and decided that wings were the best solution to the problem and so he'd become a bird. It realised that this would take MILLIONS of years, of course. So as each of its children were born the lizard passed on his plan so that the children would carry on that approach to the problem. They, in turn, had to pass on this approach to their children to resolve the problem also. He had to make sure that they kept on with that plan or they would die out from the problem that they needed to change for. Fortunately he could foresee this problem becoming bad enough to need to make this change MILLIONS of YEARS before they actually would die out. Strangely enough lizards didn't die out anyway. So it was all in vain. But birds are glad that lizards did so; and now some birds feed on lizards, making it all the better that lizards didn't die out, but leaving lizards wondering about the wisdom of it." Miss White of Brisbane asked, "If we are evolving does that mean we may end up being little green men and going to other planets"? Professor I Dunno of the Institute for Unemployed Scientists said, "one day life just suddenly sprang up and there was an incredibly complex living cell". I asked how this could happen. He explained that it was sort of statistical/magical luck. "Then the cell got lonely and decided it wanted another one; so it worked out how to evolve so it would be capable of splitting (highly intelligent these cells); and did so. And then there were 2 of them", he said. "And before you know it they were just splitting everywhere and we had piles and piles of them: All over the place". I asked him how no life had ever existed throughout all eternity before that time? "Well this has probably happened elsewhere, I'd suppose", he said. "So this amazing magic of an appearing complex living cell just popping up from nowhere has happened other times you feel professor", I asked? "Well, over many MILLIONS of years, you see", he replied. Mr/Ms Los Tie-Dentitti says, "women have evolved into men's bodies". Mr I. L. Watchit asks, "I saw a documentary on TV about moths in a place in England. They explained how there used to be more light moths and few dark ones because the dark ones were seen on the light trees and eaten by birds. But now with so much smog the trees are dark and there are more dark moths, as the birds eat the light ones. But this only proves survival of the fittest. This doesn't prove the evolutionary theory because it was already known when the theory was invented. To prove the theory evidence would have to come forth to prove the theory itself, not the known facts it was based on."? Mr B Acake of Sydney asks, "as I have rheumatism in my back wouldn't it have been better to have stayed without one"? Of evolution Dr Pluggitt of Drippie University states, "yes, we now know that bugs turned into people". When I asked him how this could possibly be, he explained, "yes, well, it all happens over MILLIONS of years, you see. Anything can be believed if you talk about MILLIONS of years". PROFESSORS GENG AND GIG – AT IT AGAIN!! QUESTION: If we were to search for the Dead Center of EVOLUTION, would we find it at Darwin Cemetery, in Fred Flintstone’s Dinosaur Zoo or at a Barney’s Rubble’s Skeleton Bank??!! Ezekiel, Skeleton Bank Teller: ‘Dem bones … dem bones … dem dry bones…’ ‘Dem bones … dem bones … dem dry bones’ ‘Dem bones … dem bones … dem dry bones’ ‘Oh hear the word of the Lord.’ Dating Methods Professor Lessor of Fundus Institute commented, "we use the finest dating methods. And we know that we are right that these bones are MILLIONS of years old. Carbon dating has been shown to be correct sometimes, to some degree, over periods of hundreds of years _ usually only being hundreds of years out. And we have other dating methods now that are almost as accurate; particularly when we recalibrate our machines when we know what date is required". Mr Form at Hard Drive said, "I was watching a program on TV the other day that carbon dated a skull found in Australia to be 2,500 years old. But the scientists didn't like that date so they went around trying all these other dating methods and finally found one that said it was about 60,000 to 70,000 years old and so they took those dates. When asked why they didn't use the carbon dating method that is so 'accurate' they said it was because the lime in the soil must have confused it". Dr G Etpade of Theoretic Institute stated, "we are at a new age now where we no longer have the problems of science in the past that almost always had theories that have been proven wrong in spite of them proving them right at the time. All our theories are correct because we have proven them right on TV. We also have a new advantage to use to convince people we're right called 'dating methods'. This is a cleaver idea where you use some instrument to obtain the date you want. We decide it's MILLIONS of years old then it becomes MILLIONS of years old". Elder Harris (The Church of Jesus Christ LDS missionary) questions, "I have heard that a rock formed by a volcano only a short time before was carbon dated to be MILLIONS of years old. Also that a rock only a few years old, brought back from the moon, was similarly dated. On both occasions the truth had been kept from those doing the dating. Why should anyone believe all this, unproven, MILLIONS of years stuff"? Dr Thinkitt of the Local Logicians Club said, "All accepted fact must be based on proven facts (premises). Therefore talk of MILLIONS of years is illogical as no one can PROVE what happened in a time of which we have no way to prove it absolutely correct. If someone makes a claim about ancient Egypt from known facts about Egypt it could be logical. But we have no written record of MILLIONS of years ago and we can't go back to prove or disprove the claim or the premises upon which it is based: Regardless of what instruments are used. No logician could accept someone saying they KNOW about MILLIONS of years ago as anything but the ravings of a fool". Miss Daytmee of Hobart says, "yes, well, my dating method is to play hard to get".