> however, not in the least, but rather why do
> credible subjects of consequence garner so little
> participation whereas fringe nonsense has such a
> hold not just on believers, but those who argue
> against them?
Is this not a consequence of the audience? I find it harder to engage with your threads typically because they are well researched. The only value I can add is to ask clarifying questions, which are often frustratingly simple and perhaps answered elsewhere.
The alt posts on the other hand are typically (although not always) poorly researched and presented. This simply allows more people to jump in and “add value”. As an example picking the recent power plant set of topics, If I started a thread that the great pyramid was a power plant built to harness geothermal energy and cited as evidence the fact it has subterranean passages and rooms. Add in the vibe I got when I visited was that this was a piece of machinery not a tomb. To throw in a conspiracy bent, it was stripped by the Egyptian monks during the Ptolemaic period so as not to let the technology fall into the wrong hands and we have a genuine alt proposition.
The entire premise is of course absurd and I have presented no evidence but the idea is so fanciful that it captures the alt imagination. many alts would become engaged because it furthers the power plant idea. Because the thread then grows in alt popularity then the non-alts need to jump in to rubbish the idea as they have relevant knowledge and the cycle goes on.
This is a long winded way of saying as many alts appear to be here for the fantasy/ escapism as for the progression of knowledge.
Interestingly, I’ve posted some threads here on purpose bordering on fantasy and barely received any pushback or support. Instead they were largely ignored just as the threads I tried some serious discussion in.