Conservapedia talk:Conservative

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Known Alias[edit]

I know he has a bunch, But can we get a running list of Aliases (Aliai?) that Kenservative goes under? Then we can start a Conservative sightings page SirChuckBWill Sysop for food 01:42, 1 May 2008 (EDT)

What was the alias he used on Wast that the Dickenson one? --Kels 12:23, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
Mark Davidson
Mark Davidson
David Beber
There's probably more, see this lot.  Lily Ta, wack! 12:35, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
This post from FRDB show that we might have missed a few. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 10:21, 21 February 2009 (EST)
Does anyone seriously think Ken that registered as KenDeM at aSK, when he has not used his own name on any posts anywhere for two years? Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 07:20, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
Check out his edits, it is all homosexuality and Hitler, I am fighting to keep the articles on track. - User \pi 07:25, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

Image rights[edit]

This is probably relevant to this page, Ken's dropped a steaming load, claiming he was unaware there were requirements on posting images. Which is a filthy lie, since he's a regular reader of TWIGO, and we've talked about it a lot in relation to him specifically, and even if remotely true it shows just how little attention he pays to the rest of CP outside his pet articles. --Kels 12:59, 12 October 2008 (EDT)


Before I ruin some subtle joke - "After being thrown out of Wikipedia for fragrantly breaking the sock-puppet rules" is surely a typo, yes? Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 05:08, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

I dunno - r is nowhere near l ;) Even if it is a typo (spell check error?) it's pretty damn funny. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:45, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

The bot[edit]

Looking at it now, its clear why andy made Ken a 'bot' - so that he (for that matter, anyone) could hide Ken's bajillion edits trying to fix how many spaces are in a line of white space. Given andy's level of wiki knowledge, this was likely some discussion at SDG2 and someone with some degree of wikiadmin posed a solution to how to ignore Ken. So now you know that you can leave the red phone off the hook. Which would annoy him more? Us ignoring him with 'hide bots' or him knowing that Andy completely ignores him. The only 'problem' with this is that it means when Ken plays with moving his pages up to the top of the main page, Andy doesn't see it (psst Kenny, do it more, you can get away with it until Jallen reads about it here). --Shagie 04:10, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

Stop using "likely" as an adverb! You know who it makes you sound like. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 06:21, 26 October 2008 (EDT)


Anyone noticed these deletions? "St. Patrick's Cathedral and Homosexual Activists" ‎and "Roman Catholic Church and Homosexual Activists" are gone. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 18:46, 29 October 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I noticed. I think it was his weak response to the debate. Discarding a couple of tiny stubs makes all the difference. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 18:50, 29 October 2008 (EDT)

The One and Only[edit]

Seriously, I'm actually starting to warm to our dear Kendoll more and more. There's just something indefatigably ... awesome about the guy. Anyone else share their (strictly platonic - it's philia, not eros) crushes on Conservative? --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!

Not particularly, but there is a certain bizarre charm to him. He has style. And, despite the lack of moral fiber in his unspeakably awful screeds, it is very hard to dislike him. It's the sort of impression I get from Mike Huckabee—I know very well that he stands for the direct opposite of everything I believe, yet he exudes so little malice that it's hard for me to take him seriously. The electrocutioner 22:05, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Moved from timeline[edit]

This has been moved from the timeline for inclusion in this article later.

Don't mess with too much. - User \scriptstyle\int_{-1}^{1}1/\sqrt{1-x^{2}}dx 05:59, 12 December 2008 (EST)


Ken recently added some comments to his talk page as an IP; out of curiosity I used whois on it, and it is registered to a healthcare provider in Buffalo, NY. Is revealing the name of this organization an invasion of privacy? I think it isn't, as he revealed his IP to us, but I want to be sure. Phantom Hoover 16:08, 12 January 2009 (EST)

The Community Standards (at least the current version; the revamp looks to be removing this) say very specifically, "even where an IP address is volunteered, discussion of the user's geographical location, place of employment, or other private information (even if publicly available) is frowned upon." Should we all be frowning now? Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 12:27, 13 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) While it is now open knowledge that he edited from a medical establishment in Buffalo, we have no idea in what capacity he was there. He may have been an employee, casual visitor (Do they have library facilities? He could have been researching gay diseases) or maybe even a patient as there have been suggestions that he has had some unspecified health problems. So I don't think we should include it as we just don't know. The one thing it does confirm (as if we didn't know) is that he operates out of Buffalo and therefore reinforces the link to kdbuffalo on Wikipedia (which he has denied, but then he has denied several of his laughable aliases). Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 12:30, 13 January 2009 (EST)
I think we should leave alone any poking into where he works, etc. We don't want to become CP in order to fight CP. CorryDr. Funke's 100 Percent Natural Good Time Family Band Solution 12:35, 13 January 2009 (EST)
Agreed. For fuck's sake, whatever a-hole put that in is worse than Karajou. Forgetting to log in before editing--especially for someone as incompetent as Conservative--is hardly "volunteering" information....TheoryOfPractice 12:36, 13 January 2009 (EST)
I've deleted the edits, but you are all "worse than Karajou", as we constantly use his real name, despite the fact that he never volunteered it. Phantom Hoover 12:48, 13 January 2009 (EST)
One note for PH - he does answer to it on the red telephone. ħumanUser talk:Human 13:52, 13 January 2009 (EST)
And you answer to Human, although I know that's not your real name. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 04:05, 14 January 2009 (EST)

(UNDENT)- 1. You're right. We Are. 2. Sorry for the a-hole blast. Above and beyond. retracted. TheoryOfPractice 12:50, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Thank you. Phantom Hoover 12:52, 13 January 2009 (EST)
It's still there in the new Standards, it was moved down to the "Deleting pages" point. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 12:38, 13 January 2009 (EST)
I disagree there oh ghostly cleaning appliance. Ken may not have volunteered his name to us, but TK has used it several times on CP (much like he used to call Jinx Jason and CPAdmin1 Tim) and he never asked him not to. Also, he has used his real name before on other forums and other areas. If his style is so obvious that people connect the dots, that's not our fault. I have had (and still have) several socks on CP and none of them have ever been connected to me. On last note, if he has never confirmed that he is indeed Ken Demeyer, then we don't know if that is his real name. We may be calling him the wrong name and he may be laughing about it. SirChuckBWill Sysop for food 22:19, 13 January 2009 (EST)
"I have had (and still have) several socks on CP and none of them have ever been connected to me." That's because your IQ is higher than room temperature. And theirs, sadly, might not be. Even on a hot summer day. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:31, 13 January 2009 (EST)
I'm sure that helps :-) But I also try to remember to curve my sarcasm and tendency to throw the joke out there when editing CP. SirChuckBWill Sysop for food 01:07, 14 January 2009 (EST)
@Human, are we talking Celsius or Fahrenheit? Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 04:03, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Kendoll sysopship[edit]

Congrats Ken on your demotion! (By the way, is this safe?) JJ4eI christen thee Sir Annoyz Alot 20:16, 14 January 2009 (EST)

He got sysopship?! What's his username?! --"ConservapediaUndergroundThermistoris an evil librul 19:41, 5 February 2009 (EST)
Newton, usually. The demotion was likely reverted quite quickly by whoever was playing the joke. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:32, 5 February 2009 (EST)

David B[edit]

I have removed this from the article:

Neither of these David B's are anything like Ken. - User \pi 02:46, 2 March 2009 (EST)


Where did we find out his name? Cubic bastard Hoover! 17:10, 4 March 2009 (EST)

His real name or his other aliases? If you're talking about Ken DeMyer, we don't have any real confirmation, he has never formally acknowledged... But it's pretty obvious, I mean... look at the writing. SirChuckBWill Sysop for food 20:04, 4 March 2009 (EST)
Have a look at the examples where he has used the name Ken DeMyer particularly theology web. - User \pi 20:08, 4 March 2009 (EST)

I quote, from this 2007 post[1]:

  • Occam’s Aftershave: Ken DeMyer is banned from TWEB
  • kdbuffalo: Occam’s wrong, I’m not banned from TWEB
  • conclusion: kdbuffalo is Ken DeMyer

  • Ken DeMyer: I have the username ‘creationist’ on CreationWiki
  • conclusion: kdbuffalo = Ken DeMyer = creationwiki:User:Creationist

  • Creationist copied material he ‘wrote elsewhere’
  • material identical to written by Conservative
  • conclusion: kdbuffalo = Ken DeMyer = Creationist = Conservative

PubliusTalk 20:31, 4 March 2009 (EST)

You forgot to say "QED". Never forget to credit quantum electrodynamics! ħumanUser talk:Human 21:15, 4 March 2009 (EST)

"Violation of privacy policy"[edit]

We can't have a longerstanding article on a major CP editor vaporised. Please restore it & just delete whatever was in violation. Also, we should discuss what the violation is & whether it qualifies. If it's just his (alleged) full name, I think it's already well enough known here & appears on far too many pages for deleting it here to be reasonable. WẽãšẽĩõĩďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 23:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to restore it, but it would be nice if the people who know/remember the various connections between his screen names, etc., would add some references or at least the detective story following his trail, so others know it's legit. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the section above is such an exposition. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:43, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
(EC)I think he just blew some steam and may be back later. It is a little OTT to kill the entire thing, I removed the skype thing. Who the hell thought that was a good idea -although you can find who inserted it in the History, I'll not name names here- I don't know, I assume most people just missed it. But yes, it's fairly unreasonable and nigh-on impossible to undo the pervaisiveness of the Ken thing, but it comes from more carefree days when we didn't think about this kind of thing. It's difficult to undo and we can't just revise history and say it never happened. Scarlet A.pngmoral 23:44, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't know how others have done it, by I have never searched for Ken the person. I have always gone to likely forums (or ones he has hinted at) and searched them for Conservapedia. My assumption is that someone here use to know him at theologyweb, were he was a proverbial pain in the arse. From what time I have spent there it seems that there is a large group of atheists and he used to get his kicks taunting them. The Austin Cline and PZ Myer's crap was easy to find as he was plastering it all over the front page of Conservapedia. - π 01:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Is he from Buffalo?[edit]

...? I shudder to think he lives in the same area as I do. Tommy (talk) 13:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes he is. He used to live in Elma, though; that is where his parents still live. Ricardo 15:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Ken and Metapedia[edit]

This might be old, wrong, misplaced, etc, but I accidentally ended up stalking Ken(?) while messing with the local Metapedia artcle.
User:Hu1 on Metapedia put up the recent jab at RationalWiki; of course, I only noticed this after reading their article on Wikipedia and seeing these edits, including a link to an arbitration case involving a User:Ruy_Lopez, who in turn was accused of further sockpuppetry (frequently, and in this case by Mr. Gerard) and has mentioned Rob, albeit in a negative "stop calling everyone commies" way.
So yeah, their styles were generally familiar, and this tangential stuff seems to fit the trail of sockpuppets he's left elsewhere. Dunno how much weight it has or anything, so I'll leave it to be checked out for now...the Metapedia stuff seems pretty noteworthy if true, though. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 16:02, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Ken is Ruy Lopez? Oh, good Lord. There'll be a trail of crap in the bowels of Wikipedia, then - David Gerard (talk) 16:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
God! Not been to aSoK much then, have you, David? 16:25, 27 May 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
This means Ken has a trail this wide and long through Wikipedia, which I'm sure would provide much entertainment for the truly dedicated scatologist - David Gerard (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Section on sexuality?[edit]

Anyone have any ideas how to fix the brief section on Ken's sexuality (where reference 16 occurs)? Sure, I find it humorous, especially the "they make no attempt to refute my homosexuality" but that is taken out of context, since he was referring to his stupid article, not his actual sexuality. Like I said, sure, it's funny, but I don't think we need to take things out of context to poke fun at him... he has plenty of material that is just terrible in context! Any thoughts? Pythonscript (talk) 00:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree, while quote-mining Ken may be poetic justice and lovely parody, if the reader doesn't "get" that aspect of it it just looks lame. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
It is in a section called "quotemine about Ken DeMyer", it is suppose to be a parody quotemine the title implies that. - π 01:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
In that case it is perfect. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:42, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
It's not the first time I've missed obvious parody; thanks for clearing that up! Pythonscript (talk) 02:10, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


Where's the script to remove Ken from CP:RC? EddyP (talk) 10:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it was a Greasemonkey script. Checks. Here Worm(t | c) 11:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Works like a charm. Just looked at CP and recent changes is empty! Oh happy day. Altho it's sad to miss out on Ken's anti-Sagan essays. --PsyGremlinParlez! 11:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Oooooooookay. Now what the hell do I do with all that text? Why yes, I am tech illiterate. EddyP (talk) 11:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
It's a Greasemonkey script. Sid gave quite a good description here Worm(t | c) 11:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Arghhhh, Firefox! Get back, monster! Thanks for the help though. EddyP (talk) 12:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


He's Catholic right? Just wondering.-- (talk) 20:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

No, he's not. By Catholic standards he'd be a heretic. He's a baptist. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
My source in his home city says he might be a Methodist actually. I would have thought Baptist from the brand of biblical literalism he pretends to do, but he's apparently not keen on predestination and some other Calvinist shit so it's possible he's an Arminian. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 23:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Doug Bamford[edit]

He doesn't act like Ken as far as I can see. Usually Ken just links spans with comments such as "have you seen the x article at Conservapedia". Also when engaged in debate Ken quotes and makes vague statements to avoid ever being wrong. - π 03:35, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Does he mention obesity at all? Ken rarely forgets his obsessions that easily, it leaks into everything he does for a while. - π 03:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Not yet, but the rest of it fits in with his style perfectly. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 03:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I can't see trademarks of Ken at all, at times he sounds more like Andy. Discussions with Ken are never normally that coherent and he has not posted a single link. - π 06:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the Doug Bamford alias. First of all there was no link and I discovered about ten DBs on FB. The evidence of just a couple of "regards" is not enough to confirm his identity. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 11:07, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
He isn't Ken, Ken has a different profile on Facebook. Quackpack11! | Talk! Scream! Share! 22:50, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

sabbatical editing[edit]

end of the 12th ken has edited conservapedia 287 times i'm glad he is taking some time away from his dutiesNailo1 (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Needs a section on "atheism and obesity"[edit]

Not enough fat. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 22:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Conservative and Shockofgod[edit]

Do Ken Demeyer and Shockofgod have some sort of connection? I think I recall an article on RationalWiki (I forget which one) claiming that they are friends in real life. It would explain why Demyers is always endorsing him.Moderateman3345 (talk) 23:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I found this [2] at shocks blog. Now if that is not a Ken article I don't know what is.--Mercian (talk) 14:30, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
It bears all the hallmarks of Ken's writing, casual assertion upon assertion based on false premises leading to unsupportable conclusions, his typical irrational obsession with attempting to debunk an ideology by personally ridiculing the weight (and based on weight, intelligence and mental health) of people he hates, and his use of a commons image with the same CC-by-SA license statement as usual. But why do you care? Shock of god and Ken are monumentally stupid people who believe monumentally stupid things and make monumentally stupid claims they can't support based on monumentally stupid false premises. Go outside. Nutty Roux (talk) 16:23, 20 September 2014 (UTC)


Wow, Really?Moderateman3345 (talk) 00:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes he write that sort of rubbish. - π 00:11, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
How do we know that Ken has machismo? Show us the peanut butter! - Jpop (talk) 00:18, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Is This Guy A Parodist?[edit]

Title says it all. If he ain't a arodist, he's the funniest, most pathetic conservative I've ever seen. — Unsigned, by: ConcernedCitizen / talk / contribs

He's not a parodist. He's mentally ill. Nutty Rouxnever mind 21:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Well now, that explains a hell of lot. ConcernedCitizen (talk) 16:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

But it's in the same manner as Fred Phelps and Harold Camping, mixed with large doses of dishonesty, so many of us consider it still okay to laugh. --Opcn (talk) 18:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Coverage of behaviour[edit]

Good new section! But five times cover(age) in a few sentences? Is this another jibe at Ken? larronsicut fur in nocte 23:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

David Jensen[edit]

David Jensen is indeed the name User:Conservative first represented himself to me in 2007. Very recently, the "pesterfesting" User:Conservative complains of, was over the identity of CP User:BobSherman. User:Conservative, supported by Andrew Schlafly, claimed that CP User:BobSherman had lied about himself, and therefore was blocked. The argument put forward by User:Conservative and Andrew Schlalfy was, that liars were not welcome at Conservapedia.

Well, I have evidence from 2007 User:Conservative lied to me about who he was. And User:Conservative confirmed it as a lie when I had phone contact with him earlier this year. He personally identified himself under a different real life name. RobSmithI have been defamed by anonymous CP trolls 20:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't really care if he calls himself Rudy Huxtable. --Inquisitor (talk) 00:07, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Klassic Ken[edit]

I checked Google Scholar for Ken's name, looking to see if he had any kind of academic background, I found none. However I did find this which lead to [this] both of which were interesting with regards to regarding ken's regardliness. --Opcn (talk) 18:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

KDeMyer alias[edit]

I call Poe. Ken has never, ever signed his real name to anything - hell, the internet doesn't even know his gender, or how many of them there are. --PsyGremlinPraat! 15:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Any possibility of making this article more presentable?[edit]

There are people actually noticing Ken's foolishness [3][4] and it'd be nice to be able to link them here. We did the "make the article about this loony referrable" thing quite well for Terry Hurlbut, how feasible is it on this one? - David Gerard (talk) 23:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

The current version of this article really belongs in funspace. Is there a sensible article that could be written? - David Gerard (talk) 23:51, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Well, I admit to some contributions here and agree that a lot of it is more fun-spaced material. However, an edited version documenting Ken's editing practices and aliases should be kept. Redchuck.gif ГенгисevolvingModerator 00:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
So, move this to funspace and make a copy here, or make a copy in funspace and edit here? Which is the most sensible place to keep the edit history? - David Gerard (talk) 00:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
There's nothing wrong with this article as it is and where it is. It's already in CP-space, or has the Committee to Stamp Out Humour on RationalWiki decided to extend its authority here now? rpeh •TCE 09:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm saying we could do with an article on Ken that isn't hideously in-jokey - David Gerard (talk) 10:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Without the in-jokes, an article about cp user:Conservative would read like a not-actually-dangerous version of Dennis Markuze, but I think there's some merit to it. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 19:34, 16 April 2013 (UTC)


Do we have a proper history of Hitwin, or did it get lost in the last Conservapedia purge? - David Gerard (talk) 15:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I have no clue but it's one of my favorite images on the internet Beatgroover (talk) 02:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Is Ken a true conservative? I have my doubts.[edit]

I am far from an expert on the political spectrum and conservatism seems to have different meanings around the world, but the one issue that always seems universal is economics. On this issue Ken seems to be rather left wing. He seems to take joy at free economies struggling, and has expressed joy at the rise in Christianity as economies struggle. To paraphrase, the recent downturn in the worldwide economy is a good thing because it turns people to God. This in my mind makes him not a conservative at all, merely a fundamentalist who takes joy in other peoples suffering. --Mercian (talk) 04:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Putting back the Awards Section[edit]

I put back the Awards section to the article on Ken because other Major Conservapedian has their awards showing. Andy has his awards. Ed Poor has his awards. So I think we should keep Ken's awards section up.--S.H. DeLong (talk) 04:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm butthurt[edit]

Ken dropped me from his Christmas card list any nobody noticed. nobs 06:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I noticed. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I been sulking over it for a month, trying figure how I offended the guy and why he'd wish a bunch on godless atheists sockpuppets Merry Christmas and leave me in lurch.nobs 14:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh pumpkin, I know... One day, he'll be sorry for mistreating you. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:46, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


Hi all,

I think that Ken and Shock might be the same person. The reason why I think this is because:

  • They both use childlike tactics when “debating” atheists, and they both have a similar style of censoring the opponent when it pleases them and then claiming victory.
  • They both frequently refer to each other and their works.
  • . Shock takes it personally when Conservative is insulted or called a “troll”, as if he were the one being insulted... hmm...

BP9See what I'm planning 14:43, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

I need to ask the experts something[edit]

I made a account there and Ken immediately littered the talk page with his Atheist hate-boner. I kinda did poke a pole at him, but he kept saying about how "multiple people" run the account. Is that true or is he making bullshit up? PoorlyDrawnRockford.jpeg Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 13:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I called him out on his referring to himself as "one of the users of the Conservative account" when he was here as User:GiuocoPiano. He then said something that I believe to be true. He gave his password to two other people. One wasn't interested and never edited. One of them probably did edit at least once. Ken used to keep going on about one page created by the Conservative account having references done completely differently from his usual pages. That one page he kept pointing to was probably created by Ken's friend. So basically Conservative is a one-man-show and the idea of the Conservative account being used by multiple people is just more of Ken's wishful thinking and another one of hid ideas for crushing world atheism that never came to anything. Spud (talk) 13:56, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
This sounds about right. As tortured as his reasoning and logic can be, I've always found he'll go to considerable lengths to avoid telling an outright lie about himself. I suspect this was the primary motivation in the password sharing / multiple user gambit: he desperately wanted a rejoinder to the periodic bouts of "Lol, ur KDM, internet famous creationist moron!", and it allowed him to "argue" that, because the Conservative account is not (necessarily) the (sole) work of KDM, no-one can ever know his true identity for certain. (?!)
Bonus lulz: A Portrait of the Creationist as a Young Ken. He's been at this for a long, long time. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 16:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)