I was convinced that they missed one, but after repeated viewings I can confirm it was only a dude with manboobs.

While funny, it's hard to actually make fun of them for their seemingly homosexual, ummm, tendancies (i suppose that would be the word) that they have over their at conservapedia. Seeing as how anybody can edit the articles, they could just be an immature joke (though unlikely given their prevelance throughout so many articles) and the attention drawn to these particular articles probably has a lot of random people looking at them. It's kind of like getting the chance to read Charles Manson's diary. What are these psychos REALLY thinking about all day? Well, "homos" apparently : )

I would like to detract my handful of hits from the number he claims are "flocking" to conservapedia for information. I merely stopped to see a bloody carwreck of human logic and stupidity. And I may have backed up to look a few more times. I'm such a lookie-loo...

By the way, someone already came up with a word to describe conservapedia: Truthiness. according to Wikiality (a clearly non-baised source for the definitions of made-up words...)- it is "the reality that is intuitively known without regard to liberal ideals such as reason and logic." Think about it. The site and its purpose was mocked before it was even created.