Are these arguments valid?

Question

"You can't prove your views, so your views must be wrong."

"No one saw X, so X has not happened."

"I don't know how this film could have been faked, so the Patterson-Gimlin film of Bigfoot must be real."

"This city can't handle public transportation because we don't have room for any train tracks."

"I can't believe this is possible, so it can't be true."

Answer 1

LOL

Answer 2

ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM

Description: An argument that a proposition is true because it has not been shown to be false, or vice versa. Ad ignorantium arguments are also known as "appeals to ignorance." This fallacy has two forms:

P is true, because it has not been proven false.
P is false, because it has not been proven true.

Answer 3

No. All of these statements seek to validate themselves based upon faulty observation and the assumption that no alternatives could be true.

Answer 4

The first answerer was the best, these are excuses, not arguments.
Have a butterscotch cookie and some warm milk, enjoy!

Answer 5

these are valid in the context they are placed
but upon closer examination we see the flaws of each
often i have experienced people doing this same thing with others beliefs
if you can't handle the heat get out of the kitchen lol

Answer 6

Nah totally disagree with these arguments, seem biased

Answer 7

Pangel obviously doesn't understand logic if s/he thinks they can even seem valid at even an instant. They are all invalid.

Answer 8

not all of them, as some are opinionated and biased towards pre existing views.
maybe try this question under philosophy

Answer 9

no not at all, they are excuses not arguements

Answer 10

re frame it

Answer 11

No.