You call Ken Ham a con artist, but it is a challenge, I think, to find that thin red line between him doing things based on the things that he actually believes (such as his pseudoscientific creationist beliefs) vs doing things out of mere opportunism. Maybe one can feed off the other...I don't know. Is that though not the challenge when encountering people like Ham, who believe what they believe legitimately, but who may act in ways at times that are contradicting to those views?