Is googlewhacking impossible now?

chubbysteve

<div class="IPBDescription">Moultano gunna need your response here</div>Have you ever whacked? I think I did sucessfully and I thought I'd give it another go but it seems pretty much impossible. I gave up at 'woomera trichromatism' when I realised the ~45 results I was getting were all word list pages. Either that or I'm an idiot. You have a go and see if I'm an idiot or googlewhacking is indeed impossible.

enf0rcer

for those of you who had no clue like I did: <a href="http://www.googlewhack.com/" target="_blank">http://www.googlewhack.com/</a> explains it.

I have never done it - I've got as little as 2 pages maybe but that's about it.

DiscoZombie

tinned nippleworts!

I stole that one from the above link <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" /> but it still works!

lolfighter

I managed to do it with my real name once.

UltimaGecko

Do misspelled single words count, because "calginosity" gets one result and it's only <i>one</i> word!?


There're too many sites with inane word lists. There's a problem with the internet when retromingent reticulation comes up with 45 results (and one of them is "12 letter words starting with R").


Coincidently <a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=halcyonic+retromingency+&spell=1" target="_blank">halcyonic retromingency</a> only returns one result, but it's a word list (and Google apparently doesn't like new-English additions of -ic to halcyon). Actually, retromingency and a multitude of obscure words get lots of one hit results, it just all comes from the same useless word list.

A_Boojum_Snark

I did it once a few years back, but I can't remember what it was anymore.

Shzar

Last summer I got only a single hit with "conquian lipsynch" (without quotes, of course). It was a word list, but I was so happy I told all my friends that I beat the Internet. Now, those words return four hits. Meh. I'm going to try and googlewhack using the rules on the website. I don't think I'll have much luck.

enf0rcer

ok so the funny this is I tried it and got it on my second try - but I don't think it counts since it's just a site with words on it. "twizzling cumber" gives me one result though.

e/ - and now maybe 30 seconds later it gives me 2. so lame.

e2/ got another one "laughing phalaphal" - maybe 6 tries by now

e/ ok my luck ran dry- I can only go as low as 4 hits now "flabbergasted gallimimus"
and now i'm just bored of it.

Rover

<!--quoteo(post=1616388:date=Mar 23 2007, 03:36 AM:name=enf0rcer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(enf0rcer @ Mar 23 2007, 03:36 AM) [snapback]1616388[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
e/ - and now maybe 30 seconds later it gives me 2. so lame.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's because of the different google servers. Searching from two different may for example show results in a different order or have a (small) difference in amount of results.

As for the googlewhacking...WTH? I fail to see the point of this -.-

lolfighter

I fail to see the point in american football but it's still widely popular.

Drfuzzy

I'm sure people use Google to whack all the time <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/confused-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="???" border="0" alt="confused-fix.gif" />

I'm sure people use Google to whack all the time <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/confused-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="???" border="0" alt="confused-fix.gif" />

moultano

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be possible, but talking about it on the internet is a good way to ensure that there will eventually be at least 1 additional result <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />

Liku

I thought I would be smart with "Google Whack" backwards, <a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&newwindow=1&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=UtE&q=elgoog+kcahw&btnG=Search" target="_blank">elgoog kcahw</a>, but there's three results.

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&newwindow=1&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=PGu&q=syncopated+hallucinogen&btnG=Search" target="_blank">Syncopated Hallucinogen</a> turns up 666 results, DUN DUN DUN!

semipsychotic

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->DUN DUN DUN!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wait, it's 688 now. No, 690.

Google is <i>gray goo</i>, people. We're all going to die.

Breakthrough

I'm scared <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />