I follow paranormal/UFO/ghost/Milab/conspiracy literature. I collect books by these authors and I like to follow individuals on their career trajectory though the subject matter. I'm more interested in the people and the amount and rate that they deviate from the mainstream.

I've noticed that their views and books tend to get more fringe and extreme the further they go on their career, which isn't too surprising, but what surprised me more was that there was less infighting than I expected, and a surprising groupthink product where all their ideas come together.

How do you reconcile aliens and bigfoot, witches, ghosts, and automatic writing, loch Ness monster, time slips and self-mummifying monks, tulpas, poltergeists and UFOs, cattle abduction and missing persons, Jewish space lasers and fae folk, changelings and vaccine mind control? It seemed like many of these were exclusive OR concepts?

They all seem to come together under one porous, unifying theory of everything supernatural. There's no real guidelines, the whole raft of authors are just continually "yes, and"-ing each other into this vast soupy mass of theories which, if I had to put a label on it, boils down to transdimensional demonology.

It's like they all sort of figured out that infighting is not so profitable, and so they are practicing academic radical acceptance without any real guiding force.

That's my take-away, anyway.