You're closed-minded, wicked one!" - a few words about internet experts on nothing

In the age of the internet, where easy access to information often goes hand in hand with disinformation, the phenomenon of online "experts" emerges, who don't always possess the necessary knowledge. Drawing on years of observation, the author of this article analyzes the mechanisms by which individuals with minimal expertise gain recognition on discussion forums. He highlights the problem of fact-checking and how pseudoscientific theories gain popularity, often attracting more attention than reliable information. He encourages a critical look at published content and filtering out false information online.

I am writing this article based on several years of my observations made on many paranormal forums and websites, both Polish and foreign.

I've been interested in paranormal phenomena since childhood. It began in the days when even the oldest highlanders hadn't heard of the internet. Back then, I reached for books by Lucjan Znicz and Arnold Mostowicz, and occasionally esoteric-paranormal magazines. It was fascinating reading – the authors approached the topics they discussed with the utmost professionalism. They strived to explain the cases they described, avoiding throwing theories out of thin air and insisting that what they had previously believed was nonsense.

Many years later, the Internet was created - a medium that allowed reaching readers incredibly quickly and created a unique opportunity to exchange views in discussion groups and later - thousands of online forums.

The internet, however, has brought with it a certain problem. It's the difficulty of verifying most of the information it provides, and the ease of creating a fictitious persona and pretending to be someone you're not. It's incredibly difficult, for example, to determine with certainty whether a UFO sighting on the other side of the world actually occurred or if someone is just playing a prank on us, or whether someone claiming to be an expert on a given subject truly is.

We had a rather well-known example of a "fake scientific personality" on the English-language Wikipedia, where a few years ago one of the most engaged users admitted that he was not actually "a doctor at the university of XXX" and that he only "stuck" DR in front of his name.

However, to gain respect on the Internet, you don't have to attach an academic title to your name...

While browsing the internet, contributing to a small part of it (administering Paranormalium and moderating the paranormalne.pl forum), and learning about the possibilities offered by this incredibly fast medium for exchanging information and views, I noticed a phenomenon that is, to say the least, disturbing. It's the ease with which one can gain recognition and "reputation" there. All it takes is registering on a forum or another on a topic you think (yes, SEEM) you're knowledgeable about, and that expertise (often just "expertise" in quotation marks) allows you to participate in discussions and start new threads. Now all you need is someone to agree with you—preferably several people. After a period of participating on the forum (often accompanied by accumulating "reputation points" or some other virtual reward for your activity, awarded by users), you begin to be considered an expert.

Oh, and one more detail – a YouTube profile is welcome, even mandatory! After all, you need to back up your theses with something – preferably a video containing some animation, graphics, video recording, etc. – to grab the attention of the discussants as much as possible.

At this stage of writing, I increasingly feel that this text will soon turn into another article about disinformation - but this is often how disinformers operate, usually unaware of the harmfulness of their activities and having a false belief in their own infallibility.

Now, a quick look at the most popular Polish forums on the paranormal and related topics. Some of the most frequently discussed topics are those about the New World Order, the attack on the World Trade Center, and the top-secret American HAARP weapon. Everywhere, you'll find threads about the US government or the secretive Bildeberg Club trying to take over the world, about bombs being planted in the World Trade Center, and about Usama bin Laden being innocent. And most recently, about the cause of the tragic earthquakes in Chile and Haiti being the top-secret American HAARP weapon. It's secret (or maybe not), its operation violates the laws of physics, and everyone who knows about it (oh, sorry! KNEW about it) has long been sniffing the flowers from the bottom.

One of the longest-lasting hot topics was the case of the comet Schwassmann-Wachmann 3, which in 2006 fragmented into pieces, one of which—a piece of space debris the size of a truck—was supposed to hit Earth. Eric Julien, a former French military controller, seized on the topic. He founded a website titled "How to Survive May 26, 2006," where he published increasingly longer articles and presented extensive analyses intended to confirm "an imminent catastrophe that could ruin life on Earth." He was aided in this endeavor by many people who believed his revelations and even translated Julien's content into other languages (including Polish). A nationwide internet frenzy ensued, one might say, briefly eclipsing even Patrick Geryl's revelations about 2012!

May 26, 2006, passed. It was a normal day, nothing special. Days passed. And nothing, nothing at all. The forum on Eric Julien's website was slowly losing users. And suddenly—hey, what's going on? The forum had been hacked! A few hours later, it turned out that some raspberry-savvy sap had deleted all the posts. Someone was trying to hide the truth and prevent humanity from learning of the impending doom! But who would want that? Was it the US government, or perhaps the secretive Bilderberg Club? These and similar suspicions caused the case of the Schwassmann-Wachmann 3 comet (which had long since passed Earth without causing any significant harm) to resurface—fortunately, only briefly, before finally dying down.

The same applies to videos shared on sites like YouTube – tons of text, close-ups, slow-motion shots, arrows, dots, animations, technical terms, and so on. It's common for the creator of a video or other piece of content to list every possible doubt that comes to mind, then attempt to dispel each one. This is all done to convince viewers and participants in the discussion of the author's claims. Users are often captivated by what they see and read, and become convinced that someone is sharing a closely guarded secret.