Sunday, June 30, 2013

#617: Ken DeMyer

A.k.a. Conservative, Peter Moore, Kdbuffalo, Peter Moore, RuyLopez (?), David Jensen, etc. (more comprehensive list here)

Among other things Kenneth D. DeMyer is probably the most highly profiled sysop at Conservapedia apart from Andy Schlafly himself, and generally in control of Conservapedia’s articles on evolution, atheism, and homosexuality. He used to trawl Wikipedia back in the days but was thrown out for flagrantly violating their sockpuppet rules. His general attitude toward atheism and evolution is that atheism is already dead and evolution is dying, and neither need be taking particularly seriously, although fone cannot help but notice that DeMyer spends a surprising amount of effort trying (flailingly) to flog a horse he desperately and loudly claims is very much dead. Among his more bizarre articles on Conservapedia are “Ponies vs. Atheism” and “Atheism and Obesity” (comments on that one here), this one, and – not the least – his magnum opus (work in progress) Summa homosexualita.

DeMyer’s favored debate and reasoning techniques are sockpuppetry, quote mining and wildly and willfully misunderstanding more or less anything and everything (e.g. here). He considers himself a great debater, but the opinion is not universally shared. At least DeMyer is evidently completely unable to recognize when his “hard” questions are completely satisfactorily answered and his points completely refuted, and will just bring up the same points and questions again and again, such as his lying about and misunderstanding of Haeckel, a form of transcendental, mind-numbing state generally known as the Dunning-Kruger effect (he was eventually banned from Pharyngula for spamming).

You can play the Ken DeMyer game here.

Diagnosis; Abysmally thickskulled, but not completely without notability insofar as his efforts are, ever so slightly, boosting the google rankings of that pile of mental rot that is Conservapedia.


  1. Ruy Lopez is an opening in chess... It is perhaps the most orthodox and popular openings in all of the game.

    I'm assuming that's what the question mark meant. Maybe it was to ask "Why the hell would this wingnut have that as a pseudonym?" To that I can say, "who the hell knows..." Maybe he likes chess.

    1. I can't imagine he'd be any good at chess, in regards to that electron-sized brain of his and RationalWiki's search results on a certain search enging starting with G, and the link in between creationism and his lack of machismo.