Can you prove an old crotcheteer wrong? Let's take a really simple example. I'd like to see information about "rocket engines." Just masses and masses of enthu

Can you prove an old crotcheteer wrong? Let's take a really simple example. I'd like to see information about "rocket engines." Just masses and masses of enthusiast information for/from a technical point of view. Think something like Atomic Rockets [1] but more technical and less sci fi. An example of the 'ethos' I'm talking about would be something analogous to Fredric Parker's videos about KIC 8462852 / Tabby's Star / 'that star with the really bizarre dimming characteristics' [2]. Just an informed, obsessive, educated enthusiast targeting the exact same. I'm certain such sites exist. In the days before 80% of Google's links went to the same 20% of sites, they were really easy to find. Google is excellent at finding low grade mass media on the latest topics, but I think their ability to find meaningful information has been deteriorating. E.g. getting back to those video's on tabby's star - if I search google for the same, I find no less than 4 hits with aliens in the title and just about as many alluding to have found 'the' explanation. It's complete trash (though Fredric's videos do hit the second page!). Granted, it's closer than the hardcore porn I might have found on the first page searching in the late 90s, but it seems like we've replaced porn with clickbait. If that's my choice, I'd prefer tits. [1] - http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/ http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/ [2] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHLjfagBDOw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHLjfagBDOw