>

Yeah they should chat gpt-in it
who has hit the most home runs in the World Series? >

Just Yahoo! it, man. >

I'm going to ask jeeves! >

Infoseek it. >

Funny how even in this joke thread, no one says Bing it lol >

I've resorted to using this on people who have no real interest in looking at my proof anyway. Too many times I've done the research and provided the evidence to the person only for them to ignore it, misunderstand it, or read the first sentence and start arguing again. At that point, I just tell them to Google it themselves since I'm not going to waste more energy if they won't meet me in the middle. >

schools really done screwed up by calling it "research" when you just look up the actual research that someone else did and paraphrase it. >

What's the difference between that and say.... doing the exact same thing but out of an encyclopedia? >

The biggest difference is that the info in the encyclopedia is static and likely wrong, given enough time. Outside of basic facts that are unlikely to change. >

Right, so it's even worse than googling yet it's considered research. >

not so much anymore, but in that transition time when we all still had encyclopedias, and the internet search was becoming a common thing, the peer reviewed set of bound knowledge was more trustworthy than the random page you found that could have been written by literally anyone. >

I think it’s lazy for people to not just google it and do the work themselves when i tell them to google it. 
I understand that peoples preferences could get different results but not that different. And they may have to do a little digging or fine tune their queries but the same information I find is available for everyone.
Having said that if somebody challenges me I will often provide links to articles and they can either follow the links or not. >

I love googling stuff mid-discussion. If something sounds just slightly unbelievable in a discussion, I'll grab my phone and google it.
People sometimes get offended by that and I don't understand why. If you're so sure about your point just use the "I told you so" afterwards.
Some people will go on to a tirade about me not "trusting them". Obviously I'll trust you if it's inside your field of expertise, if I know you studied it. But if you don't study the behavior of moose or orcas like hell I'll just blindly believe that orcas are a natural preditor of mooses. >

If you ask me some stupid ass question like why are bananas yellow I will tell you to Google it. But if it's something spesific about my area of expertise, I would be happy to help. >

Stupid is a relative term. But seriously, why are they yellow? >

what would you expect them to be? green? imagine that! how absurd! >

Can you imagine if they were blue? Pure insanity >

Have you ever seen a blue waffle? >

I don’t believe I have, I’ll look it up after work.
Edit: Ayo wtf? >

That's an old school internet trick lol, right up there with lemon party >

It depends really. If you're having a debate with someone, then 'Google it' is not really a great argument, but sometimes people ask a question that would take 2 seconds to Google for the answer. >


but sometimes people ask a question that would take 2 seconds to Google for the answer.

you mean the "just asking questions" side >

"I'm just asking easily answerable questions with no intent on listening to the answer" >

Google en passant >

Holy heck >

“Source?”
“Lists 10 sources proving my argument”
“I’m not reading all of that, oh and my point still stands” >

Either that or,
*Lists one article from someone who has no relevant experience in the field*
"Oh, so you didn't actually research this, you just posted based off of one biased article." >

I'd change this to "google is your friend" >

Or "let me google that for you". >

Precisely >

Cuz this is reddit on I'm not gonna write a explanation for something you can just google >

Based on your spelling, punctuation & grammar, it’s not shocking you’re one of the people the OP is complaining about. >

bro stfu? ppl talking informally online =/= illiteracy??? like i can type like this
Or I can be an asshole and type like you. >

If you type like that reddit, you’ve got to be prepared for ppl to @ you.  Using correct grammar doesn’t make you an asshole. >

using correct grammar doesn’t make you an asshole, i agree
but they literally say “because of the way you type, you’re the ignorant kind of person OP is talking about”
so all i meant was having good grammar on stupid posts online is not equivalent to someone’s intelligence nor can you base anything off the way they type. i change the way i type all the time. business emails? i’ll have good grammar 
posts on reddit? hell naw nun dat >

I don’t know, strawberriangel…I read that and can’t help but think you’re either really young, or a little uneducated.  Unless you typed it that way to make a point…? >

no i’m 23 😭 i just have always typed like i can’t spell. idk. actually writing correctly feels like i’m having a serious convo with my dad or something ahahaha 
i also have auto correct off and when i make typos i just let them fester heh >

Why would I waste my time doing homework for YOU? Yeah, ain't gonna happen. Just fucking Google it. >

“I don’t have time, what’s X?” might be the most annoying question on social media. >

Not googling something that could easily be answered in seconds is ignorant surely lol. >

That's the entire point - it's condescending and ignorant because instead of asking you should know to just google it for yourself.  
The way to get people to stop saying 'just google it' is to stop asking questions that you can google the answer to for yourself. >

🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾 >

Additionally, asking social media a question you could easily Google is lazy & obnoxious. >

Entitled, too? >

For sure. >

There is a practical difference in context between "I am avoiding having to actually present evidence towards my case" and "stop wasting my time".
"Google It" covers both scenarios. Either the arguing party is discussing in bad faith, or you are.
Unfortunately, this bit of human nature on either side of these problems is unlikely to be resolved with language semantics... >

But also there are people who just think "source?" is a form of argument especially read threads like this about something that isn't even important and I'm thinking like - Jesus christ just Google it yourself. It's not that big a deal lol especially if its about a celeb and well know. >

I only use Source? when someone when somebody posts something ridiculous that they obviously got from a right-wing blog. >

I say ‘google it’ to those who comment ‘who is this’ on posts of celebrities when you know they are just trying to use some odd flex about they are so unaware of current pop culture. sorry, that ended up being a very specific mini rant >

Most of the time, these arguments are about dumb, basic, rudimentary facts. These aren't about complex subjects or philosophical or political issues. Oftentimes, you tell people to google something if they're getting a very easily verifiable fact wrong. >

I play an mmo thats been out for 8 years and it always drives me crazy when a new player asks a question in server chat and people condescendingly tells them to google it. 
There's a lot of changes even to fundamental systems of the game and there's a ton of outdated guides floating around. There's also a lot of misinformation posts from who I would describe as superstitious conspiracy theorists who say stuff like if you drink this elixir at this spot it gets a secret buff or something. 
There's also people who talk about stuff they don't know. I saw someone telling a new player to level their horse to max and then reroll the horse skills. That method can cost that player hundreds of dollars to get the skills they want. The optimal method at the time is to level the horse to 1/3 or 1/2 and then start rerolling the easy to acquire skills for the horse which cuts the cost down to 15ish dollars. 
That's also an advantage of live group chats like the mmo server chat. If someone sees misinformation they can interject and correct it. I potentially saved that new player from spending 300+ dollars when they don't need to. >

Depends on context really. Also, some answers really are Google able, especially when it comes to yes or no questions. I think people just get upset because they think someone is better than them when the truth is a lot of answers really are Google able. Not to say discussions shouldn't happen but they should be framed that way imo which they are often not. >

It’s funny when I do Google it, come to a forum where the top and only post is some douche saying “Google it”. I FUCKING DID AND YOU’RE THE ONLY FUCKING RESULT HERE >

I get your point where it's kind of like saying science says but the difference is that if you ask the same question you'll likely get identical results. Differing results likely have to do with different ways a question was asked. Also if someone says google it they are literally holding you to a higher standard of proof and inviting you to pull out ur phone and prove you wrong. This is a great response when you dont believe someone. You are literally fact checking. >

Nah, ain't my job to explain to you why you're wrong with that level of detail. If something is easily confirmed via a quick Google search, I'm not doing that because you already should have. >

It has to be used correctly. You can only use it if the other person started the discussion, because that means they are the one who have the issue, not you. It's not your job to educate.
It's not ignorant, it's how the world works. Something counts as accepted until it is disproved. But the disprover is the one who has to do the first step. >

when people make claims that would require them to have specific information to make them, and then refuse to even provide a source and instead tell you to look it up, I just assume its because they know they can't. >

I was reading an article on why people will automatically respond with this depending on certain words that you use in the original question. >

I agree. They could at least give a 'let me google that for you' link. >

I put these people in the same category as "Read a book" or "wake up, sheeple". 
It's entirely reasonable to ask someone to cite their sources. If you can't, don't be surprised when your random opinion is attacked. >

Tell you’re MAGA without telling me you’re MAGA 
“SHEEPLE”
🙄 >

They were screaming it. >

These people do this because they have no idea what they're talking about. Anyone that avoids going into details or explaining themselves, but insists on arguing, is only trying to mask their ignorance and bury you with information they never read. >

I mean... Occam's Razor would say the simplest explanation is that internet arguments are fruitless endeavors, and investing time and effort into them is a waste of time...
But whatever makes you feel morally superior, friendo. >

If they were fruitless endeavors then people wouldn't get into arguments in the first place >

First day as a human? 🤨 >

I agree on some points tho I doubt it will matter for most arguments >

Semi agree, sometimes my wife does this when we’re having a discussion and she’s explaining something or talking about something and I ask a question. I find its usually not intended to be mean or rude but it’s how society is now days…. No more debates or discussions just - here’s the fact talk about other stuff now >

Oh bröther >

Depends on the context, if you're looking for statistics/facts which can't reasonably be memorised, then "google it" is fine.
Like, "ermehgerd my favourite band is better than your favourite band, my band has a bigger fanbase"
Terrible example but you get the point
If it's something political, then you should KNOW because these are ideas that you agree with and stand behind! In this case saying "google it" makes you look like you've just succumbed to herd mentality.
If you disagree with me, f*** you, go google it! >

You're right on with this, if you bring up a point, IT IS NOT UP TO THE OPPOSITION TO PROVIDE PROOF, google will feed you what they think someone like you would want to see, so they keep their traffic up. someone Telling an opposing opinion to google their own side of an argument, are usually doing so because their opinion is based off of feelings instead of logic >

Sometimes the case but it’s not my responsibility to prove something factual to someone who lives in a land of bullshit and « alternative facts ». The information is out there, not my fault people cherry pick « facts » to build their worldview. It’s usually in response to saying something completely factual that I have knowledge about when someone replies « prove it », like I don’t have time for that shit, if you want to be informed it’s on you lol >

gOoGlE iS fReE >

It’s not our job to provide evidence to people who are refusing to seek out or accept the same evidence. >

What would be an example?  I hear this sentiment a lot, and I guess it's just a matter of what types of things you are searching, and if they are all wide open to interpretation.
But for the things I search, whether it's google, yahoo or bing, I pretty much get the same results.  One of them condenses the results and gives message like they've hidden 120 other redundant results.
But I cant find it in my own personal searches. 
Can someone give a specific example of this happening with google compare to other search engines? >

I feel like people who say google it don't know the answer either but instead of being quiet they just want to be assholes >

Ok but what if someone says something easily proven not true with a quick google search? Like why should I provide evidence when google will compile it for you? >

I mean it’s a very direct approach to “I’m only going to google this, so why don’t you use google like everyone else” >

It largely depends on the question being asked and just saying "Google it" does come off as rude, but I've found people like to ask questions that are so simple that it really does make more sense to look it up that bother a person about it who wouldn't know it right away. Heck, THEY might Google it to provide you the answer lol >

I tell people to Google it so they can have the source up as well, because it's foolish to trust all the words of the one you're debating with. It allows them to pull up the point I'm making so I'm not just talking out of my ass for it >

True >

Mostly.
However, if I'm having an argument with someone, say about the flat Earth, and they ask "where is the proof that the Earth is not flat" I may tell them to google it. Because it's pointless actually doing it and showing them the errors of yourself; it's already out there and they could easily know better already. The fact that they don't shows they're probably not going to believe you anyway...in which case let them google it and be convinced or not. Pointless arguing with someone who refuses to listen.
But that's only for really well known or obvious things. For others, yes you should google it yourself and give them the link. After all you might learn you are wrong in the process! >

People really need to get taught how to google stuff, it’ll give almost any answer they want. I’d google it for them >

In 1979 Xerox got mad at NY times for saying "xerox it" saying it's capital "X" and no "ed". 
If you don't believe me "Google it" >

I agree, this can be a dismissive way to end an exchange with someone you disagree with.
But I also accept that we are increasingly in a digital world.
My point being: I'm striving to live in the world we LIVE IN more and more every day, rather than trying to live in the world I WISH we lived in.
This distinction may account for why some folks are so sad about new things, when surely they could adapt with the same amount of energy (or less) they expend griping about things.
We live in a digital world, and the younger folks are not going to apologize to us old heads for living now, nor should they. >

I only did this when I was driving and the person don't know what I was talking about or refuse to believe me, then, I said that. Because I am just too busy. >

I used to say google it, when I was tired of typing and such, google it is still a good option, maybe just add the question you can ask google. 
It’s not condescending or ignorant if you ask me at all, I think it’s just the way you’re taking it. The only thing you’re saying is that “I’m too lazy to do the research this person previously did and I feel entitled to the point where they need to show me everything instead of just doing it myself” >

No it’s actually the best way to teach people because informed ignorance is a thing. >

No. It's an appropriate response when a troll won't listen to your argument nor step back and investigate information. Said troll often is resorting to the troll tactic of "show me proof" as a counter argument, placing a burden on the other person to dig into reference material only for that information to be summarily ignored by said troll anyways. >

I know many people who are very quick to resort to googling, when I much prefer a conversation and to see what we each really know. 
Some seem to get a rush out of being right, but little do they realize they don't know shit, they just Google everything. >

Yeah I know that's why I prefer this >

When you are in an argument and you made something up and tell them to “google it” is ultimate troll move.
How many times has someone actually googled it? >


condescending

Sure?

ignorant

I know words, and I WILL use them! >

Agreed, and would add that sometimes it's really hard to find the right results on Google if you don't know enough about the topic to create effective searches or sort through thousands of results to find a single piece of information >

We have the collective knowledge of the world at our fingertips. When one is saying something remarkably ignorant that a cursory search would answer their inquiry, it is appropriate. >

No amount of factual evidence will change an opinion derived at without factual evidence... 
So why waste time citing facts they won't believe. I would say they likely ignore folks that say anything they don't agree with. Putting the burden on them to give proof that you will call fake, biased, or just totally ignore is disingenuous. >

I once said something similar on a thread and was downvoted into oblivion.  Google isn't going to relay the human part of certain things.  The nuance of it all.
There are times when "google it" works as a response, but there are times where input from people is the better. What if I'd rather have a conversation and human interaction?
I can't upvote this as I agree depending on the topic. >

Google en passant >

I only say Google it if a person has never heard of a commonly understood concept or word definition. >

I don’t use it as much to prove a point, but rather to show how blatantly ignorant people are that they can’t even access common knowledge, so googling it is the best option. >

I say Google it because most times, that question is answered by a simple search. 
Or use the search engine bar? 
Try looking for an answer before you ask the same question l, over and over again, that someone already  asked. >

I just googled lazy people who think if you have to google then you don’t have a valid point and this post was first >

People that ask questions that are common knowledge and easily google-able because they are too lazy to put the effort in to find the answer themselves are more ignorant and condescending. I'm not your personal teacher responsible for educating you on things you should already know or I'm going to have to Google myself. Also, Google can often have a more complete answer while a answer from a person is onky as good as their memory/patience. >

Meh depends on the topic. If it's objective and you're being annoying, I'll tell you to google it and leave. 
Told a ceo who was being a jackass to google it then quit. >

'Google it' does have some function. Such as obvious answers to obvious questions >

I mean if the argument is, is x or y true. Usually google search is the best/first thing to do as youll get an answer who is right and who is wrong. I have a feeling you have been wrong... a lot :D >

Google en passant >

I tend to fall back on this when it becomes clear to me that the person I'm interacting with is not behaving in good faith, and/or is demanding I provide them with links and answers to really commonly known things. That, or the depth of explanation they're looking for seems unreasonable and rises to the level of necessitating they do their own in-depth reading on the topic (i.e. if I'm making a point about propositional logic, but it becomes clear the person doesn't have any grounding in epistemology at all, that's a moment to prompt them to "google it" in a manner of speaking). 
Also, it is true that the search algorithm tailors results to the preferences of the individual, but that doesn't mean we're all just getting wildly different results all the time; it's certainly not a reason to stop from prompting someone to spend the effort of educating themselves on a given topic. If I tell you to google the 2008 financial crisis, it's unlikely that I get economic articles explaining what happened and all you get is Steve Carrell's wiki page and nothing else relevant. Not to mention that if we're going back and forth on something, and I tell you to google an answer to a specific question, and you respond negatively to that, that's a pretty clear indicator that you aren't actually interested in understanding further and are more interested in arguing and being a troll. >

Yep duckduckgo it 
But yep good point >

I prefer, "It's not my job to educate you. Read a damn book." >

I say it all the time to people who are way too lazy to show any type of initiative or curiosity and just expect you to provide the answer.  For instance, "How do I program this remote?".  Now I am not a font of relevant information concerning the programming on remotes, let alone your specific one.  What I'm going to do when you ask me this is "google it."  But you could have done that as well.  In fact, you should have done that instead of texting me the exact fucking question you could have put into google and gotten a precise answer, sometimes with a helpful video!  So perhaps if you're hearing this, what they are really trying to say is for you to show some type of god damn intellectual acumen and try to at least get an answer before you make me waste my time looking up some fact that has a thousand fucking answers to it on the internet.  On the same rant, I also really hate people who go onto a thread and ask a question that A. can be answered by google. B. has already been answered 100 times in the same thread.
Also, I'd like to know what exactly you are looking up that would give you a different answer based on preference?  Like sure, you can get a bunch of answers saying something crazy like the holocaust never happened, but those are from bonkers, crazy, obviously biased sources.  Also, why the fuck do I need to give you a dissertation and quote sources and evidence. This ain't court or school man! >

It depends. 
If I think the person is actually interested in looking at my sources, I'm happy to provide them. If the person is being rude to me, I'm also very happy to provide them because I'm a petty bitch. 
But if they're just sealioning, I'm not going to spend time or energy on them. >

You're also probably the kind of person who won't click on links so you can't be proven wrong >

Yet it's generally the appropriate course of action. >

My main issue is when this kind of thing, or variation of it, is said on r/learningprogramming. A big issue in the “tech” community, is that a lot of them have been interested in the topic intrinsically for many years, and have learned how to find information efficiently, and have an easier time learning it than complete beginners who may have no idea where to start with certain topics. Some of the people on that subreddit assume that anyone who asks a question that seems too easy must not have done their due diligence to research the topic themselves before asking. A lot of times, it largely has to do with not knowing what vocabulary or terminology to use, or even when you do find an answer, it’s difficult to understand what’s being said - so you then go onto the subreddit which is “supposedly” intended to help people learn, just for them to then get lectured that they aren’t trying hard enough to find the information on their own. 
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve used this subreddit with success in the past, but I’ve also been unnecessarily lectured about not trying hard enough to find the answer. It’s annoying >

If you Google 2+2 and don't get 4 because of your "personal preferences" then you have an issue >

Depends on the point and if the person is receptive. 
My partner didn’t believe me when I told him hair and nails DON’T keep growing when you’re dead. 
Had to tell him to google it, so he’d believe me! It’s an actual fact, so the search results will always be the same no matter who searches.
But if it’s a “bigger” topic of conversation, for SURE, one should be able to make their case in  their OWN words, whenever prompted! And with good reasons why I should ignore the results that contradict their point if I do google it. 
I don’t think it’s condescending tho, it’s lazy and a cop out. People do it when they know they’ve got nothing. >

Burden is on you if you disagree with an opinion because you are not educated enough on the topic. If I tell you something and you don't understand, I'm not gonna site all my sources. Google it, then get back to me 🤷🏽‍♂️ >

Those are the same people who would cite a Facebook post as their evidence >

95% of people don't cite their claims. If you did research, there's supposed to be evidence to support your claim. >

Maybe, but I will continue to tell people to Google it. >

Oh my goodness! I was in a DV relationship with a man who only listened to google and his mum. Even if I said it first, or if I was correct, it wouldn't be accepted unless either one of them said it too. It was crazy! Such a put down too. 
So in a sense I agree with this post. Only due to experiencing it from someone on the daily just to always try and prove me wrong, not believe in me and just wanted to not listen and trust me. 
FYI. If I don't know the answer to something, I admit to that. If I knew I was certain about something, it still wasn't accepted unless Google said so. He purposely did it at most to put me down and make me feel stupid.
In the end my line would be 'google it' instead of responding, knowing damn well i wouldn't be listened to. >

On the other hand, I have an actual paying job that involves researching things, but I don't come on Reddit to work, I'm not making extraordinary claims, and throwaway_user_6969420 isn't paying me. So I don't feel compelled to look up basic facts that actually can be easily Googled by anyone who has the tools to reach Reddit. >

Can i ask what kind of job it is? Sounds interesting but what do you do then? >

Also, do you like it? >

I agree. It's lazy and proves it's now that important if you can't be bothered to explain it. >

RTFM >

People who say it are rather thick >

Most situations it is used because people don't have any evidence to back up what they are claiming. I agree with you. >

"Bing it!" >

If someone fails to provide any form of evidence at all and just says 'Google it' then they are likely full of shit. However I have found that many times after presenting lots of evidence to support my claims in various internet discussions, there are always people who won't bother to read any of it and will just keep repeating what they've been saying and acting like they are the victor of the discussion as a result. In those circumstances I just make it clear that they aren't listening, tell them to google it, and move on. People are so lazy nowadays and just need to do their own research instead of talking out of their asses online. >

It's also counterproductive. Googling and the resultant rabbit holes is exactly what led up to the argument you're having. You both found sources online that led to your worldviews. Telling your interlocutor to do more Googling is unlikely to turn them to your cause. >

Just ChatGPT it >

if you want to talk to people these days, and you actually know what you’re talking about, its not like you have a bag of printed out articles that corroborate what you have to say. so “google it.”
Or when someone talks so you about something and they aren’t really interested in the truth, they’re just interested in arguing with you, you say “bro just google it, im done with this conversation.” >

Google En Passant >

I have what I believe is the point that demonstrates that you're right on the money. Simply put, having too many results is definitely a thing, but people always make the clearly risky assumption that the person hadn't googled it or was getting too few results out of ineptitude. 
Also, crowdsourcing the question might get you some hidden gems or resources. I saw a "google it" turn into that same person later reccomending something 35 minutes into a podcast. And often, the top results are not at all the best results. Anyway, totally agree dude, good post, you have 3 more wishes. >

I really hate the 'google it' thing.
For one, Google doesn't always give you the best results.
For another, it doesn't always give you the *same* results as someone else, as you said. (Two of my brothers were googling a car part. One on a computer, one on a phone.  They googled the exact same part, and got different results, and they were standing next to each other)
For a third, even if you get the same results, what links are they looking at?  With some subjects you can get 3 dozen links, all contradicting each other, and you don't know which particular link the person is using.
If you have a point to prove, then YOU need to provide the links, because if I google, I might find other links that fit my own confirmation bias, and thus refute your point, based upon my own research. >

The issue here I think is context. If it's so dumb that literally just looking it up on Google would get you the best possible answer in every instance why are you sitting here trying to ask The question. Extreme specifics about car parts isn't the same contacts and if you're using Google it in that instance you're an idiot but if I'm saying Google it I'm saying it because the person asking the question is asking a question so right away available there's no reason to be asking the question. >

I was just saying that google, in cases where there is nuance etc.. google isn't a good tool because two people can google the same thing and get two different things. The car parts was just an example of what they were looking and how even such a 'simple' thing got two different results.
I mean, if someone asks, What is 2 + 2, google it is a perfectly acceptible answer.  But if you are debating something, or using obscure terminology, telling someone to 'google it' when they ask a question is not helping (especially since sometimes even google fails, I once looked up some abbreviation and to this day still don't know what it was supposed to mean, and I can't even remember the acronym now). In a debate, the onus should be on you to provide the links to the examples/sources you are using (just as if I counter them, I should be the one to provide the sources I am using to back up my claims) and obscure terminology can be difficult to figure out.