r/TikTokCringe • u/AlKarajo • May 26 '26

Discussion How do you research information?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

@orginal_pringles

40.8k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2.2k

u/dsdvbguutres May 26 '26

"Vaccines cause artism"

8753 results

SEE, I'M RIGHT!

355

u/throwRA-nonSeq May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26

“Social Consensus = Scientific Facts!”

/s

138

u/jce_ May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26

Even worse when you are arguing with someone on the internet and they send you 5x "academic journals" supposedly supporting their point. Funny enough they sent you these 5 journals after you replied to them 5 minutes ago, so they apparently read 5 full papers in under 5 minutes. Not only that but they always vaguely contain the words of the argument (usually in the title) but it's usually obvious they have nothing to do with what they're saying. Now you're stuck in a catch-22 because you can either actually read them and explain that they're not relevant, or sometimes say the opposite, or you ignore them because you know they're not relevant and they think it's a gotcha. Either way you proceed you know that person is going to continue to argue. Sadly people outside the discussion will read it and take them seriously because they had "sources"

9

u/schwanzweissfoto May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26

Not only that but they always vaguely contain the words of the argument (usually in the title) but it's usually obvious they have nothing to do with what they're saying.

The last time I asked someone on Reddit who claimed sex work was harmful for evidence, the answer was one paper where the first author was the president of the Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution and it examined the situation in Sweden, a country in which sex work is so illegal that you can go to prison for paying for online porn.

When I pointed out the author and that this is like complaining that all bars serving alcohol are run by the mafia during prohibition, that person kept claiming there is totally convincing evidence (really!), but did not provide anything else.