You are closed-minded, wicked one!

What's particularly irritating is that such "truth seekers" often employ a multitude of scientific concepts that, as it later turns out, they don't understand themselves. Just like in a certain Silesian joke, in which a foreman comes to miners and preaches to them: "Dry up, miners! Those who don't understand me are intelligent people, and those who don't understand me, I can't kiss their ass, and vice versa!" Often, a person truly familiar with the subject matter, upon seeing the work of a "truth seeker," will knock their forehead, shocked to discover that the culprit lacks even the most basic knowledge of what he's writing about.

Such people, if they've been active on forums for a while and a sizable group of users agree with them, eventually come to be considered experts. Over time, the threads they post become increasingly longer, containing charts, analyses, and explanations of why things are said this way and that way. They also incorporate a lot of scientific and pseudoscientific slang and phrases like "science from a few years ago is outdated" or "the latest discoveries are being suppressed." All of this is done to make the text long and intelligent, as this greatly increases the chances of convincing the average person.

A reply appears. It raises some doubts. Alarm, alarm, intervention needed! So the thread's author responds and attempts to dispel any doubts. More replies appear, and the discussion develops. Someone agrees, someone confirms something "based on their own experience," someone states, "It's okay, but..." Generally, up to this point, most participants agree with the thread's author.

Suddenly, however, a highly undesirable element appears – someone who dares to express an opinion completely different from that of the "expert" and "truth seekers." They express their doubts, point out the "expert's" errors and omissions, and correct some information. Often, this "element" is right on the matter, or at least more knowledgeable than the "expert."

In response to the "element's" "antics," the "expert" and the "truth seekers" launch an attack. Harsh words are thrown, often invective and vulgar, and the "element" is told that he's closed-minded, stupid, knows nothing, and believes the "official (read: false as hell) version of events." Well, maybe he also claims that he has an inflated ego and, with his level of knowledge (which, in the "expert's" opinion, is a "lack of basic knowledge"), should be thrown out and straightened out.

Generally speaking, if you are one of those "elements" who really knows something and wants to contribute something new to the discussion, then if you end up on a forum dominated by one or more "experts"... you will die miserably, overwhelmed by a mass of pseudo-arguments and bombarded with a bunch of "intelligent" nonsense...

The situation is similar with many blogs and websites. Here, too, the owner can publish their own content and position themselves as an "expert in the field," creating the impression that they're sharing a closely guarded secret with readers, the disclosure of which carries serious consequences. Blog owners also have a powerful tool at their disposal – a comment moderation panel. If a comment is disliked, it can be deleted or edited. It can also be approved – at most, the blog author or their readers will scold the author like a dog.