#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.

#578: Harold G. Coffin

Harold G. Coffin is a palaentologist and creationist (and signatory to the CMI list of living scientists who accept the Biblical Accountof Creation). He has some publications in regular journals, none of which support creationism, but has also written a slew of creationist articles for creationist journals, for instance on how the origin of coal may support a Catastrophic Flood theory. The argument consists pretty much of identifying a potentially unanswered question in modern geology and inferring from this that Flood geology must be better. His creationist ad hoc interpretation of polystrate fossils has not been accepted by mainstream scientists either, to put it mildly, though Conservapedia is apparently impressed.

Coffin witnessed during the McLean vs. Arkansas Board ofEducation trial, where – among other things – he admitted that were it not for the Bible he would have believed that the earth was very old, which is (though creationists may deny it) a straightforward admission of how much creationism has to do with science (also here).

Diagnosis: One of a frighteningly huge number of influential figures in the fight against reason, Coffin is neither the most aggressive nor the loudest. That doesn’t entail that he is not dangerous, however.

#495: George Berkin

George Berkin is a conservative (well, fundie) columnist for NJ.com who is sufficiently wingnutty to have been caught defending Conservapedia on at least one occasion. He also produced an extraordinarily tasteless column on Hitchens’s sickness, arguing that God is being good to Christopher Hitchens by afflicting him with a lingering disease, because it will give him a chance to repent, concluding by encouraging everyone pray for a deathbed conversion. If nothing else, this kind of reasoning shows why fundie beliefs are insane and a threat to civilization.

Being an asshole is not enough to get you an entry, however. More importantly for our purposes is the fact that Berkin is a stooge for Intelligent Design Creationism (no, he has no clue about biology – of course not), who combines his delusional advocacy with an unhealthy but expected dose of fundamentalist Christian persecution complex. After a screening of Inherit the Wind he was absolutely shocked when the audience did not agree that intelligent design should be taught in public schools. He went on to claim that those who deny that creationism is science are as “intolerant and close-minded” (i.e. if you deny that false beliefs are true you are intolerant) as the pious Hillsboro Townsfolk from the film. Ergo, Berkin is now being vehemently persecuted (never mind that he has his own column on nj.com).

His defense of Intelligent design is the standard PRATT canards: “Darwinism” is a religion, while intelligent design is pure science since intelligent design advocates make no reference to religion at all – this is backed up by quoting Phillip Johnson  and Michael Behe!

Here, for your amusement, is another crazy, Martin Patterson, making the evolution-is-a-religion argument.

Diagnosis: Another insane fundie (plenty where he came from), who appears to have a certain substantial audience regardless of the vile lunacy of his rants. Evil chowderhead godbotter.

#97: John A. Davison

Internet kook with his own idea on evolution (“Anti-biotic resistance is not evolution because it is reversible. No evolutionary event has ever been reversed. Besides evolution isn't even going on any more”). In fact, his idea is only a regurgitation of an old crackpot idea and his references are usually to papers from the 1940s and earlier. A clear case of delusions of grandeur; his is apparently “the most important battle in the history of mankind”. Conservapedia seems to like him (as does Dembski), though the semi-creationist, bottom-tier journal that actually published his stuff apparently wants nothing more to do with him (he has completely lost it, as can be seen from this interview). He did have a publication, though, and that is the main reason why he deserves an inclusion here, despite the fact that he is, for the most part, an Internet kook.

Davison is actually legendary for his Internet trolling (“you have a John Davison infection” has become a diagnosis for especially newly started, science oriented blogs that draw the attention of Davison or his acolytes) and he is banned from several Science-oriented blogs, including Panda’s Thumb. He is known for setting up multiple blogs himself; each one consisting of a single post, inviting comments. Most of the comments are from himself, however. When he feels like that blog is "full", starts another one.

Also famous for trying to have blogging academics fired from their institutions for being critical of his work, or – since that doesn’t work – trying to spam them.

Diagnosis: Extraordinarily attention-seeking kook who seems to have gone completely insane. I almost feel sorry for the guy.

#64: Gerald Celente

Celente is a “professional” trend forecaster and founder of the Trends Institute. He predicts future trends – in particular economic ones – with all the accuracy and razorsharp precision of a tabloid newspaper horoscope. He claims to have predicted more or less every major economic event in the last 30 years, establishing himself as a modern counterpart to Nostradamus. For example, Celente predicted on February 14, 1999, about the approaching millennial New Year, that, "Employers should anticipate several weeks of low productivity” and that children graduating in 2000 will "shape the new millenium." He has also predicted that America is going broke. A true wizard.

His method seems to be an Other Way of Knowing (intuition, mostly).

Curiously (or rather, unsurprisingly), he has received a lot of press, particularly from conservative sources – especially his assertions that American President Barack Obama's policies (described as “fascism light”) will lead to food riots and tax revolts. Indeed, Celente plays a major role in Conservapædia’s article on Barack Obama.

He seems to be the instigator of the term “Obamageddon”, which is predicted to occur in 2012. Made on November 13, 2008: “[B]y 2012 America will become an undeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts.”

The basis for the prediction has, of course, all the rigorous underpinnings of the ordinary, “Mayan calendar” 2012 Armageddon. If nothing else, however, Celente and his reception among pundits provide a fascinating glimpse of the mechanisms of confirmation bias, goalpost moving and wishful thinking at work.

His website, interestingly, does not keep track of his previous predictions (apart from the ones that could be interpreted as having been fulfilled by some stretch). He does provide “trend summaries” – his summaries of events occurring the previous year.

Diagnosis: Probably a fraud, but his confirmation bias and wingnuttery is real enough. Very influential, something that provides more evidence (if any more was needed) for the ubiquity and danger of confirmation bias.