Shameful Google Searches when you Forget a Word
Credibility score: 71/100 — Mostly Credible. Mixed credibility - some claims are solid, others need verification.
BSmeter analyzed "Shameful Google Searches when you Forget a Word" and rated it 71/100 for credibility (a BS score of 29/100 — mostly credible), on 2026-08-03. Its weakest claim — "Made-up drug name treated as superior to real medication" — scored 20/100 and was flagged as false equivalence. 32 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 32 claims analyzed: 1 scored under 40, 3 between 40 and 69, and 28 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Relatable word-forgetting + Google fix framing — No Frame (75/100)
At 0:00
Sets up everyday brain-fart moment, no loaded language or exaggeration.
Why this score: Speaker just describes a normal memory lapse and how search helped — zero spin, zero hidden agenda, just plain anecdote. Neutral framing lets the humor land without steering the audience.
Original quote: “Forgot the word tumble weed. I forgot the word the word tumble weed. What a tumble weed was called. Google still got me though. What are you going to ghost town ball? Old western ball in the desert. Balls of moving lonely sticks. Straw ball the flies by in movies. I YouTubed the MIA song paper…”
Forgets video title, searches by describing it instead — No Frame (75/100)
At 0:30
Straightforward personal anecdote — no loaded language or exaggeration.
Why this score: Just telling a relatable story about using Google to find something by describing it rather than naming it. Clean framing with no rhetorical tricks.
Original quote: “When I saw this comment, I don't know the title, so I searched.”
Used location description to find Beverly Hills via Google — No Frame (75/100)
At 0:53
Simple example of descriptive search — no embellishment.
Why this score: Plain recounting of a workaround that worked. No emotional buttons or loaded framing here.
Original quote: “forgot what Beverly Hills was called and just Googled LA. Fancy place. It worked.”
Claims searched for 'articulate' via roundabout phrasing in incognito — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:11
Personal story, no loaded language or exaggeration.
Why this score: Just sharing a funny workaround. Clean framing, no attempt to manipulate the audience's reaction.
Original quote: “I forgot the word for articulate and I had to type word that means you are good at speaking into Google in incognito, right?”
Used 'brands of dog' to find the word 'breed' — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:21
Straightforward personal anecdote — no rhetorical tricks.
Why this score: Simple recounting of a workaround. No emotional buttons or loaded framing.
Original quote: “I couldn't remember the word breed, so I had to Google brands of dog.”
Used 'Twink lizard Pokémon' to find the actual name — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:34
Funny personal workaround — no loaded language.
Why this score: Straightforward anecdote about using a memorable description to find a name. Clean framing.
Original quote: “I COULDN'T REMEMBER A POKéMON'S NAME, so I typed this into Google and it gave me the right one. Twink lizard Pokémon.”
Used 'cat's neck handles' to find 'scruff' — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:43
Playful personal anecdote — no rhetorical tricks.
Why this score: Just sharing a creative workaround. No loaded language or exaggeration.
Original quote: “I forgot the word for scruff, so I Googled how to find your cat's neck handles.”
Used 'not bananas' to find plantains — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:53
Simple personal anecdote — no rhetorical tricks.
Why this score: Just sharing a funny workaround. No loaded language or exaggeration.
Original quote: “I forgot what plantains were called. So I googled not bananas.”
Used Inception quote to find the movie name — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:59
Straightforward personal story — no loaded framing.
Why this score: Clean anecdote about using a memorable line to find a movie title. No rhetorical tricks.
Original quote: “I couldn't remember the name of that movie with the loud inception. Google is a good friend. Dreams feel real when we're in them.”
Used roundabout phrasing to find Oedipus — No Frame (75/100)
At 2:11
Personal anecdote — no loaded language or exaggeration.
Why this score: Just sharing a funny workaround. Clean framing, no rhetorical tricks.
Original quote: “I had to Google literal [ __ ] in mythology but I couldn't remember Edipus.”
Googled 'Jesus Christ hut' for nativity scene — classic brain-blank workaround — No Frame (75/100)
At 2:30
Straight recount of literal search — no loaded language or exaggeration.
Why this score: They're just describing the exact ridiculous query they typed. No spin, no attempt to make it sound smarter than it was. This is clean framing because they're owning the absurdity instead of trying to dress it up.
Original quote: “make my room wet. I I completely forgot what you called the traditional nativity scene. So, this is what I Googled Jesus Christ hut.”
Corn that pops — exact search preserved with self-deprecating framing — No Frame (75/100)
At 4:16
Literal search quoted plus honest self-assessment, no rhetorical softening.
Why this score: They're pairing the exact awkward search with their own commentary about their 'dumb rat brain.' The framing works because they're not trying to distance themselves from the moment — they're fully embracing how ridiculous it sounds.
Original quote: “Forgot the word for popcorn. And all I could think was, right, it's not peanuts. And I went to Google, what is the corn that pops? Before it clicked in my dumb rat brain.”
Made-up drug name treated as superior to real medication — False Equivalence (20/100)
At 4:42
Equates a nonsense word with an FDA-approved drug — the joke only works by pretending both are equally valid options.
Why this score: The bit sets up 'Vivance' as a plausible alternative, then knocks down Viagra for comedic effect. In reality the two aren't comparable; one is a branded medication with documented efficacy, the other is phonetic gibberish. The false equivalence fuels the punchline.
Original quote: “My brain kept spitting out vivance. Vivants for your erection deficit disorder. I mean, you can take this Viagra if you want. You can take it all you want. It won't do anything. I guarantee you. Not compared to the majesty of Vivance.”
Misspelling framed as normal memory failure — Missing Context (50/100)
At 5:47
The misspelling is so far off that autocorrect would never rescue it — the anecdote hides how unusual the attempt was.
Why this score: Most people who forget 'Segway' would try 'scooter,' 'two-wheel transporter,' or even 'that thing from Arrested Development.' 'Paul Blic' is not a near miss; it's a complete phonetic swing-and-miss presented as an everyday brain fart.
Original quote: “I forgot the word Segway, so I had to Google Paul Blic.”
Google search fail framed as 'vagina seal' instead of 'foramen skull' — No Frame (75/100)
At 6:30
Just telling the story straight — the search term was literally 'vagina seal' for 'foramen skull'.
Why this score: They're recounting an actual embarrassing search result without exaggeration or loaded language. Straight personal anecdote, no framing tricks.
Original quote: “I googled vagina seal because I couldn't remember the word forman skull”
Google fail: 'obsessivempulsive disorder' instead of 'tunnel vision' — No Frame (75/100)
At 6:35
Literal recount of a garbled search attempt — no spin, just the raw typo.
Why this score: They're owning the mistake without trying to make themselves sound smarter or dumber than they were. Clean framing of a personal fail.
Original quote: “I forgot the word tunnel vision. So I tried to Google it and what's it called when you always focus on someone that is obsessivempulsive disorder”
Two more search fails: 'naked snail' and 'autumn melon' for unknown words — No Frame (75/100)
At 7:00
Just listing more examples — no exaggeration or attempts to make it seem worse.
Why this score: They're simply adding to the list of absurd searches. The framing stays consistent: 'here are the ridiculous things I typed.' No rhetorical tricks.
Original quote: “I just Googled naked snail cuz I forgot the name of... Forgot the word. So, I had to Google autumn melon”
Self-deprecating joke: 'I ain't never seen two smart best friends' after the cow search — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:09
They're turning the embarrassment into a relatable punchline about friend dynamics.
Why this score: Classic self-roast framing — instead of just saying 'I forgot the word cow,' they spin it into a broader joke about how one friend is always the dumb one. It's playful and doesn't overclaim.
Original quote: “Yeah, but why buy that many? Just stick to one. Moo milk is fine. Moo milk. Oh, the animal that moos. Which animal makes the moo sound? Cows. Cow. It's a cow. I ain't never seen two smart best friends. Always one of them got to be dumb”
Final example: 'porch but in the air' for balcony — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:25
Ends the segment with one last literal, ridiculous search phrase — no embellishment.
Why this score: They're closing the loop with another straightforward example. The framing stays consistent throughout: 'these are the dumb things I actually typed.'
Original quote: “I forgot the word for balcony, so I Googled porch but but in the air and found it”
Describes Googling 'many lightsabers man' for General Grievous — self-deprecating anecdote — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:30
Straightforward personal story, no loaded language or authority claims.
Why this score: He's just recounting a real moment of forgetting a name and using a descriptive phrase instead. Clean framing — no exaggeration or persuasion happening here.
Original quote: “I couldn't remember a general grievous name. So I googled a many lightsabers man.”
Admits Googling 'get away from my daughter' for Liam Neeson — funny, self-roasting story — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:42
Pure anecdote, no attempt to persuade or exaggerate.
Why this score: He's leaning into the absurdity of his own search history for comedic effect. Straightforward and self-aware.
Original quote: “I couldn't remember Liam Niss's name. So I Googled get away from my daughter.”
Tried 'evil joint share' for nightmare blunt rotation — fails spectacularly — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:47
Self-deprecating fail story, no rhetorical moves.
Why this score: He's highlighting how bad the guess was for laughs. Honest framing of a failed attempt.
Original quote: “Couldn't remember the term dreamer blunt rotation, let alone a nightmare blunt rotation. So this is what I googled to try and figure it out. Evil joint share.”
Googled 'head slicer invention' for guillotine — classic descriptive fail — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:58
Pure personal anecdote, no loaded framing.
Why this score: He's just sharing another ridiculous search. Straight talk about a real moment of word loss.
Original quote: “Forgot the word guillotine and had to Google head slicer invention to remember it.”
Googled 'underarm smell good' for deodorant — peak brain rot moment — No Frame (75/100)
At 9:03
Self-roast anecdote, nothing manipulative.
Why this score: He's exaggerating for humor but owns the ridiculousness. Clean, relatable framing.
Original quote: “I needed deodorant from the store but forgot the word for it. So I googled underarm smell good.”
Googled 'long donut' and 'suck duck' for éclair — escalating absurdity — No Frame (75/100)
At 9:12
Pure comedic anecdote, no framing tricks.
Why this score: He's doubling down on how bad the guesses got. Honest self-roast with no persuasion angle.
Original quote: “I forgot the word aclair, so I Googled LONG DONUT. SUCK DUCK.”
Googled 'thing that has sand in it. Time' for hourglass — painfully literal — No Frame (75/100)
At 10:03
Self-deprecating anecdote, zero loaded language.
Why this score: He's showing how basic the description got. Honest recounting of another brain fart.
Original quote: “I forgot the word axelottal last night. La. I forgot what an hourglass was called, so I Googled. It's thing that has sand in it. Time.”
Googled 'telescope two eyes' for binoculars — shared family brain rot — No Frame (75/100)
At 10:13
Simple anecdote, no authority or spin.
Why this score: He's making it a group fail for extra comedy. Straightforward and relatable.
Original quote: “My cousin and I forgot what binoculars are called, so googled telescope two eyes.”
Cousin googled 'zoom goggles' for binoculars — escalating the absurdity — No Frame (75/100)
At 10:18
Pure anecdote, no framing techniques.
Why this score: He's topping his own story with an even worse guess. Clean, funny storytelling.
Original quote: “Pion forgot the word for binoculars and had to Google zoom goggles. Zoom goggles.”
Googled movie plot instead of definition — classic word-retrieval workaround — No Frame (75/100)
At 10:31
Straightforward personal anecdote, no loaded framing or exaggeration.
Why this score: She's simply describing her actual workaround when the right word vanished. Framing stays neutral — just 'I couldn't remember, so I tried this' — no attempt to make Google look worse or better than it was.
Original quote: “I forgot the word hereditary. So, I Googled that one movie where the girl loses her head to a pole in a car accident instead of like word for when something can be passed down or inheritable synonym.”
Claims Google 'went for the jugular' — anthropomorphizes search algorithm — Emotional Button (45/100)
At 10:49
Turns algorithmic literalism into intentional cruelty — classic 'Google is out to get me' framing.
Why this score: The search engine simply matched 'apothecary' + 'animals' to the nearest literal result. By saying Google 'went for the jugular,' she's framing an indifferent algorithm as malicious, making a mundane mismatch sound personal.
Original quote: “I googled apothecary but for animals because I couldn't remember the word menagerie and Google really went for the jugular.”
Google showed 'divorcees' instead of 'dinosaurs' — blames search engine for typo results — Missing Context (45/100)
At 10:56
Omits that autocorrect or similar spelling likely triggered the odd result.
Why this score: The algorithm didn't randomly insert 'divorcees'; it responded to a near-match in spelling or prediction. Leaving out the probable typo makes Google look arbitrarily unhelpful rather than reacting to user input.
Original quote: “I couldn't remember the name of the shoe bill stalk. So I Googled birds that look like dinosaurs. Yeah. But and now I'm wondering how Google birds that look like divorcees made this list but not dinosaurs.”
Found a real 'Guy' in Coldplay — surprised the search worked literally — No Frame (75/100)
At 11:13
Clean recounting of an unexpected literal win — no rhetorical spin.
Why this score: She's acknowledging that the dumb-sounding query actually returned a factual answer. The framing stays neutral: 'I tried this silly thing and it happened to be correct.' No exaggeration or blame.
Original quote: “Finally, I Googled Coldplay guy because I couldn't remember the front man's name. But uh no, it turns out there was actually someone in Coldplay named Guy.”
See the full analysis with timestamps →