For decades, and even centuries, knowledge and information were considered trustworthy through a process called peer review.
A scientist would push through research and development and come to a conclusion. That conclusion was then forwarded to others knowledgeable in the field. These reviewers would then consider the findings and pronounce their judgment. Whole journals would then be called upon to publish these findings for the larger community.
If your findings could not be substantiated – or, heaven forbid, some reviewers just didn’t like you – your work was dead in the water (which would not be great if you were talking about propulsion of a sea-faring craft!!).
With the internet, we are placed in a whole new world.
Peer review can quite literally happen on your Facebook or LinkedIn page. Verification might end up being rather scanty and scary, but you could claim victory if enough of your comments were favourable.
So, my question is, how do we differentiate various opinions? Are new quality review channels arising? Or are the old channels still applicable? Are these tried and tested channels able to accommodate a strong internet presence and quick response rates?