Please name & describe frequently seen LOGICAL FALLACIES. Also, why did you pick the particular ones you did?

Answer 1

Evolution is a giant logical fallacy.

#1 - If evolution were true there would be millions of "missing links" waiting to be found. So far all of them have been hoaxes.

#2 - If evolution were true we wouldn't have found soft dinosaur tissue, but we did.

#3 - If evolution were true we wouldn't have found dinosaur footprints and human footprints on the same rocks, even overlapping at times, but we did.

#4 - If evolution were true we wouldn't be finding thousands of ancient artifacts (such as pottery) accurately depicting dinosaurs on them.

#5 - Evolution isn't true because the dating method chosen by evolutionists is only accurate IF they are correct. The other method is accurate only if young earth creationists are correct. So all dating is unreliable.

#6 - Evolution isn't true because evolutionists ignore the obvious evidences of a global flood.

All of the above statements are fallacious.
WILLFUL IGNORANCE- (http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Wilful_Ignorance)
-You commit this fallacy if you ignore any evidence brought before you, without attempting to give reasons.
SUPRESSED EVIDENCE- (http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Suppressed_Evidence)
-When presenting a case, omitting important evidence that would hurt one's own case.

***Both of these fallacies have been committed because transitional fossils HAVE been found. A LOT of them.
***The “soft tissue” isn’t quite the soft tissue that C.L. Richardson thinks it is (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html) and it doesn’t disprove that the fossil was 70 million years old or that evolution happened.
***The supposedly human footprints found at Paluxy are thos of another dinosaur, not a human (http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Human_footprints_have_been_found_with_dinosaur_tracks_at_Paluxy). Those found at Laetoli were hominid, but not that of modern humans (http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Laetoli_footprints_were_human)
-Also committing the “Equivocation” fallacy
***The artifacts “depicting dinosaurs” look nothing like dinosaurs, but even so, there are also artifacts depicting Minotaurs and women with hair made of snakes, which we can safely bet have never existed.
***Isotopic dating is accurate when properly done. There are several other methods that can be used to date fossils, and when used in conjunction, they tend to agree with each other. When they don’t, scientists try to figure out why. When creationists can come up with a better way to accurately date fossils, then they should tell us. Unitl then, they continue to commit the fallacy of thinking that evidence against evolution is evidence for creationism. That’s not how it works.
***There is absolutely no evidence, geological or otherwise, for a global flood (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html).

For a complete list of creationist arguments and their logical fallacies, visit http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Creationist_arguments.

Good reading!!!!

El Chistoso

Answer 2

Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance). This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false.

Argumentum ad verecundiam (argument or appeal to authority). This fallacy occurs when someone tries to demonstrate the truth of a proposition by citing some person who agrees, even though that person may have no expertise in the given area.

Straw man. This is the fallacy of refuting a caricatured or extreme version of somebody's argument, rather than the actual argument they've made.

Argumentum ad numerum (argument or appeal to numbers). This fallacy is the attempt to prove something by showing how many people think that it's true.

Circulus in demonstrando (circular argument). Circular argumentation occurs when someone uses what they are trying to prove as part of the proof of that thing.

Answer 3

Strawman fallacies are the most frequently used on here, particularly by those seeking to disprove evolution.

Argument from Design. Ditto

Argument from Incredulity.

False dilemma.

Begging the question--Everything in the Bible is true and I know this because it says so in the Bible. God must exist because if he didn't exist people wouldn't believe in him.

Slippery Slope fallacy--usually in connection with gay marriage, and claims of "persecution"

Appeal to numbers/mob rule-- X million believers can't be wrong.

Appeal to Consequences of a Belief-- Pascal's Wager

Shifting the Burden of Proof--Prove that God doesn't exist. Burden on proof is on those claiming He does, not on those who don't believe.

"No True Scotsman" fallacy-- pretty self explantory if you substitute "Christian" for "Scotsman".

Argumentum ad verecundiam: Einstein/Newton/Da Vinci was a Christian, you know.

Irrelevant conclusion: Churches perform a lot of good in their communities, so Christianity is true. Tacitus wrote about the existence of Christians, therefore Christ must have existed.

Answer 4

the respond is ordinary, the ecosystem and the training you have been noted with is what you're dedicated to and could pass any depths to show others that they are incorrect..why? this is because of the fact people won't be able to come to stand the reality that they were incorrect all this time. this is not stupid, this is what they have been noted with and in. this is existence. For which you will possibly might desire to benefit the cognitive dissonance concept. It explains a great style of stuff approximately it. stable success with it. =]

Answer 5

"Post hoc ergo propter hoc."

Essentially, it happens when somebody assumes that, because Y came after X, X caused Y. For example, if grades increased in a school after a uniform policy was implemented, this does not necessarily mean that the uniforms caused the grade increase.

I chose this one because I see it frequently, and nobody has mentioned it yet.

Answer 6

Evolution is a giant logical fallacy.

#1 - If evolution were true there would be millions of "missing links" waiting to be found. So far all of them have been hoaxes.

#2 - If evolution were true we wouldn't have found soft dinosaur tissue, but we did.

#3 - If evolution were true we wouldn't have found dinosaur footprints and human footprints on the same rocks, even overlapping at times, but we did.

#4 - If evolution were true we wouldn't be finding thousands of ancient artifacts (such as pottery) accurately depicting dinosaurs on them.

#5 - Evolution isn't true because the dating method chosen by evolutionists is only accurate IF they are correct. The other method is accurate only if young earth creationists are correct. So all dating is unreliable.

#6 - Evolution isn't true because evolutionists ignore the obvious evidences of a global flood.

Answer 7

The Argument from Incredulity.

"I don't understand how X could have happened without Y happening first. Therefore, Y happened".

It's come up a few times today.

Answer 8

The belief that pigs will one day evolve to grow wings.
I'm holding tight to that one =D

Answer 9

We don't know how life formed, so it must be god's work!

Because it makes zero sense to assume this to be true just because we don't know the origin of life.

Answer 10

logic is a fake