I didn't waste my time reading the nonsense post above, already knowing most of these fallacies have surely been used, as always. If it were any other delusion, this guy would be in a hospital! Somehow, we still tolerate this god delusion and all the lies that come with it:
Top 25 Creationist Fallacies
1: Foundational Bias: In Foundational Bias, you admit bias towards a certain conclusion before making an argument. Foundational bias is not based on evidence or logic, but it is instead based upon personal preference and belief. Therefore, foundational bias opens the door to all logical fallacies.
2: The Straw Man Argument: A straw man argument is made when you construct a misrepresentation or oversimplification of your opponent's position. You then easily refute your own constructed straw man, but you have not responded to the substance of your opponent's argument.
3: Hasty Generalization: A hasty generalization attempts to reach beyond its grasp and draw major conclusions from a minor subset of data. Great claims necessitate great evidence. Creationist claims often make hasty generalizations, sometimes from a single case.
4: Argument from Authority: An argument from authority involves setting up an expert on a subject. The fallacy is not made in merely having an expert, but instead in using their "authority" to exempt their statements from criticism and to validate their claims.
5: The Ad Hominem Argument: An ad hominem argument consists of issuing an attack against the person making an argument instead of addressing the substance of the argument itself. It is the opposite of an argument from authority.
6: Appeal to the Majority: An appeal to the majority, a.k.a. an ad populum argument, is made when an argument is asserted to be true because the majority of people believe it to be true. This is similar to an argument from authority. The fallacy is in assuming people's belief in a proposition somehow validates it. Truth exists independently of whether you believe it or not.
7: Quote Mining: Quote mining is the abhorrent practice of searching through large volumes of literature or spoken word to "mine out" any quotes from opponents that may seemingly support your position. In most cases, the quote is clearly taken out of context in a deliberately planned campaign of disinformation.
8: Man-on-the-Street Interview: A man-on-the-street interview is a combination of an appeal to the majority and quote mining. It employs several logical fallacies, and, frankly, the opinion or knowledge of a person randomly met on the street (internet) has absolutely nothing to do with rational debate.
9: Non Sequitur: Meaning literally "does not follow." A non sequitur is formally defined as any conclusion that does not follow from the premise(s). We us non sequitur to specifically refer to arguments that do not follow from
any logical train of thought. Often no real connection exists from these non sequiturs to any version of reality.
10: Red Herring: A red herring is not so much a logical fallacy as a distraction technique. In response to an opponent's position, an irrelevant point is made. It can even be a valid point, but does nothing to address the issue.
11: Argument from Personal Incredulity: In this fallacy, one argues that because they do not
personally find a premise to be likely or believable, it cannot be true, regardless of evidence. The fallacy lies in presenting one's beliefs about a proposition as evidence. (The biggest creationist fallacy for design and against evolution)
12: Argument from Ignorance: In this fallacy, an appeal to ignorance is made as one argues either that a premise is true only because it has not been proven false or that a premise is false only because it has not been proven true. The "god of the gaps" argument usually begins with an appeal to ignorance.
13: Violation of the Philosophy of Science: The most powerful tool to obtain truth about the natural world is the scientific method. However, science cannot be used to explain the truly supernatural. Whether or not you believe the supernatural exists:
"Science makes no comment on the supernatural."
14: Equivocation: An equivocation is the misleading use of a word with more than one meaning. In creationism arguments, the most common equivocation is the word "theory." In science, theory means "a logically coherent model well-supported by evidence." In popular usage, the definition of theory is closer to conjecture or opinion. Do not confuse the two.
15: False Dichotomy: In a False Dichotomy, two mutually exclusive options are set up as the only possible choices. Therefore, if one is true, the other must be untrue. The fallacy is that the options may not be mutually exclusive (or even related) and that other choices may exist.
16: Begging the Question: Also known as Circular Reasoning, Begging the Question is a fallacy where your conclusion is implicitly or explicitly assumed in your premise. Therefore, the illusion of logic is presented when, in fact, no proof has been made. (Think AFadly's post at
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=83.0 a.k.a. The kalam Cosmological Argument.)
17: Tautology: A specialized form of Begging the Question, a tautology occurs when the premise and conclusion of an argument are identical. While a tautology (A = A) is true and the repeated statement may also be true, a tautology proves nothing outside of itself.
18: False Premise: In a false premise fallacy, the conclusion of an argument is invalidated by an incorrect assumption in one of the premises. You can't build a house on a poor foundation. Foundational bias and ad hoc reasoning usually have a false premise at their base.
19: Ad Hoc Reasoning: Ad hoc reasoning (meaning "for this purpose") is done to salvage an argument that rests upon a shaky foundation. Ad hoc reasoning attempts to address unstable or invalid portions of the failed argument. It is often used to avoid reevaluation of an argument's validity.
20: Slippery Slope: A slippery slope argument states that accepting a certain argument will lead to a chain of events that culminate in an undesirable outcome. The validity of the argument is not addressed, only the imagined outcome.
21: Correlation Implies Causation: This fallacy states that because two events are correlated, there exists a cause and effect relationship. The two variables may be caused by a third variable or may be completely unrelated. An example of this fallacy is: "Atmospheric co2 and crime levels have both risen since 1950. Therefore, co2 causes crime."
22: Creative Math: Probability arguments employed by creationists often employ creative math, where they make it seem as if the odds of something occurring without creation are incredibly remote. This is essentially an elaborate straw man argument.
23: Moving the Goalposts: When the rules to obtain satisfactory completion of a goal are changed just as they are about to be attained, it is referred to as "moving the goalposts." The trick is that you can never meet the goal when the goalposts are continuously moved.
24: Just Plain Nonsense: Sometimes the failure in logic defies easy explanation. Examples in this category usually require a massive disconnect from reality, and the result is just plain nonsense.
25: Outright Lie: Not so much a logical fallacy, the outright lie is simply deception in its purest form. Truth is discarded as superfluous in this type of creationist argument.