>

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'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. >

It'd be research as a noun in the 2nd and 3rd context... 
Which is. "To collect information about a subject" or. "A careful and diligent search" 
So yes you can say you did research... you don't have to be the first hand acount researcher on the base subject. >

sure, but many research papers are essentially book reports.
having an opinion and then looking for information online to support your opinion is not legitimate research.
nor is the basic act of acquiring new information. >

You are wrong... the literal definition of research is what I posted. 
Don't like it. Tough luck. Still wrong kid. >

Lol, ok Boomer >

I don't understand how that makes me a boomer...  but that is the go-to saying now for internet crybabies to use when proved wrong and butthurt. So makes sense. >

That's definitely something a crusty boomer would say.
And I just don't feel like wasting my time with an old troll incapable of having a conversation without being "right." >

Yet.. here you are... still conversing. >

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 >

ChatGPT-Bing it >

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 >

“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." >

Google en passant >

Holy heck >

Holy check >

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. >

On the other hand, nothing is more frustrating than searching for a very specific problem that leads to a thread of someone with the exact issue and the top answer is Google it >

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. >

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 >

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... >

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? >

I'm a writer - not the fun kind, like books or scripts. I write web copy, blog posts for businesses, podcast notes, sometimes technical manuals or instructional ebooks - things like that. Some of it requires zero research; some of it requires about the same amount of Googling that you'd use in a random Reddit debate, some of it takes a bit more than that 
For instance, I try to be very, very, careful to only use high-quality, reputable sources when writing for a doctor's or lawyer's website, especially if I'm supposed to explain some specific condition or law or courtroom procedure or whatever. I'll go look up medical/legal journals or find something on Google scholar. I don't want to mislead anyone about that kind of thing, and I know a good chunk of stuff on random websites is just written by other people like me who may not be careful, so I don't use that. But if I'm writing about pool safety tips for a pool installer's website - I mean, I'll still look for a good source, like Red Cross or something, but a regular Google search is good enough. If I'm writing about saving space in your custom closet, a Women's Day article about the Marie Kondo method of folding is a perfectly fine source. If I'm writing home page copy for a site, I probably don't need to do any research at all - just make them sound good and use keywords that will help the site's SEO. 
I have a staff writing position for a marketing company and I freelance for a few different organizations/people, so what I'm doing varies wildly depending on the day. But honestly, I took an internet research class in college because it looked like an easy A and it turned out to be the most useful course I've ever taken. (it was also an easy A; this isn't brain surgery).
I do like it, though! Some of it is the same things over and over again, but I learn lots of random new things all the time too. I like that. >

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

“Google it” is an acceptable response to stupid comments like “who is ?”. But when having complex discussions and asked to back up your points with data etc, “Google it” is a douche bag answer. Be prepared to back up what you say or be disregarded. >

Never said any different. >

I know, I was just backing up your point. >

Sorry about that. I’m so used to getting yelled at on here, I’m a little touchy. >

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

Because the burden of proof is on you. If I tell you that lizards are actually robots, I can't just tell you to Google it. I have to give you evidence and reason to believe that. You're not going to go on a wild goose chase for something you don't even know if it's true. You have to prove it to me, im not going to prove your point for you >

You're right. YOU need to prove me wrong (because everyone knows that lizards are aliens, not robots). So, YOU need to do the research to prove YOUR point. I'm not trying to change your mind. You're trying to prove me wrong, so YOU get to do the homework. >

Lmao I think this is a miscommunication from a poorly worded point.
If I'm trying to say lizards are in fact robots not aliens, I can't tell you to Google it. Even if you are saying they're aliens, I need to provide you a reason to debate back. I can't tell you an absurd argument and then say "well prove me wrong then." That's some fallacy actually, forgot the name of it. I can't say we dont need water to live and then say you need to give me all the reasons we DO need water. I need to make a sufficient claim before you even have something to debunk. If that makes more sense to what I was trying to say >

Not a bit of sense in any of that mess, sorry. >

Ah, I see. Alright man, just because you have the reading comprehension of a mushroom, and the discussion skills of a toddler, does not mean another has a point. Was that the best representation? No. But I already made my point and you proceeded to say the exact same thing I did while arguing with me. Thus I tried to rephrase. For you to understand. I'm having a respectful conversation, you're just trolling around for some fun. Have a good day, and maybe find a hobby. Cheers. >

You did no such thing. I'm certain that my reading and writing skills are far superior to those of any mushroom or toddler. Your personality, on the other hand, would be comparable to a toddler having a tantrum over being fed an old, nasty mushroom. >

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. >

🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾 >

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 >

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. >

When they're basing their post around a "fact" that hasn't actually been acknowledged by the relative research community, I will ask for their source. Most times it's from an influencer with an unrelated bachelor's degree, meaning the poster has done no relevant research and their post should be taken with a grain of salt. >

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

Google en passant >

holy hell >

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! >

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. >

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 >


condescending

Sure?

ignorant

I know words, and I WILL use them! >

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. >

Google en passant >

holy hell >

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. >

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 >

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. >

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. >

They might just be saying 'Google' it to stop someone from interrupting them, or from  asking about details that are unnecessary for the discussion.
"Alright then, that wraps up my talk about Newton's Inverse Square Law, and why it's important when dealing with radiation. Are there any questions?"
*Person raises hand*
"Yes?"
"When was Sir Isaac Newton's birthday?"
"Google it."
The twat with the question can say: "He's a physicist and I attempted to start a discussion about Newton, and he told me to google it." But it was a disrespectful question and a waste of the lecturer's energy. >

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. >

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. >

A client asked me how to write a letter of reference.  I do not work for them, that is not my job that is not the business I work for job.
I told him to Google it.  Don't make me do work (unpaid) for you because you are lazy.  I do not get paid for that.
And he figured it out and brought it in to us. Like a responsible adult. >

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 >

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” >

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? >

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.