I was playing around on my computer recently when I had nothing better to do. I could have been cleaning, dusting, packing for my impending move, or going through huge piles of clutter to find things that I can throw out prior to the move, so it isn't like I had nothing to do. I just had nothing BETTER to do.

So I started farting around with Google, to see what can actually be looked up on the internet.

It turns out that almost anything can, so I decided to make a game of it. Within certain restrictions, I wanted to see how long it took me to get no hits on a Google search. I didn't have the restictions right off the bat; the "rules" developed as I went along.

I started with the pseudo-word "ploink". I chose that because of my lifelong affinity for nonsense words, with "bink" and "spooge" being two other long time faves. "Ploink" got 55,400 hits, starting with the "Ploink Brothers". I can't tell you anything about them, however, since the site was in German and my knowledge of that language comes entirely from beer bottles and signs I saw on "Hogan's Heroes".

Next I tried dogs eating apples, which came back with 1,220,000 hits. I realized that I hadn't used quotation marks, and thus got any site in sight that had any of the three chosen words. I wondered why, given that fact, I only got 1,220,000 hits. I can only guess that that was all Google figured I would have time to look at that day. I tried it again in quotes and got "about four" hits.

Now, THAT bothered me. "About four"? It seems that a computer that can count to 1,220,000 could count to four with a reasonable degree of certainty. It turns out that the two it didn't show me were identical to the two that it did, so there were exactly two. Neither site had any problem with a dog wanting to eat apples.

Next was "Krishna Awakens". This hit 278 times. The guy's an insomniac. He should lay off the sodas after 6:00.

"My spleen hurts" got 429 hits. This bothered me as well, since I was getting more esoteric yet finding more sites than the last two times. I didn't stay. If I read too much about it, MY spleen might start hurting.

By now I decided to have a minimum of two words, to keep it from being too difficult, and a maximum of three, to keep it from being too easy. I also decided that to find a zero, I would have to get fairly ridiculous.

So then I tried "trees run fast." Amazingly enough, I found 35 sites, although there was always a comma after "trees". I decided that that counts anyway, since it's MY game. I also learned what to do if a rhino charges at me. You guessed it.......... look for trees, and run fast. I really did not need to be told that second part.

I figured I had it the next time, as I typed in "The moon farts." "About" 26 hits. 26! I didn't read them, because I really didn't want to know. I can tell you that there were no commas.

I tried "The Queen's panties", since I figured that no one would want to write about that. I mean, ick. Lady Di's, perhaps, or Fergie's since they'd be laying around all over Europe, but the Queen's? What sick bastard would want to write about THAT? Ask the 50 sick bastards that did.

Finally, "twelve silver pigeons" got me nowhere. I didn't look, but it would be ironic if I had simply picked the wrong number.

So, it took 8 tries to get nowhere with Google. What did I learn?

First, I learned that there just might be too much information on the internet.

Second, I realized how absurdly easy it is to get that info. I grew up in the days of library cards and the Reader's Guide. Finding "about 26" articles about the moon farting would have been a career opportunity when I was in school.

Third, I learned that I can be awfully easy to entertain.

What's YOUR Googletrolling score?