Which logical fallacy annoys you the most?

The fallacy that the fact that there is NO objective, empirical, testable, confirmable evidence of god is a fallacy, or that the Bible can be used to verify itself.

Okay. I'll admit it.

Fundie Evangelical Protestant Christers are the walking talking ranting spewing logical fallacies that annoy me the most.

Eye roll

Appeal to emotion – an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning.

Appeal to fear – an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side

Appeal to flattery – an argument is made due to the use of flattery to gather support.

Appeal to pity (argumentum ad misericordiam) – an argument attempts to induce pity to sway opponents.

Appeal to ridicule – an argument is made by incorrectly presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous.

Appeal to spite – an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party.

Judgmental language – insulting or pejorative language to influence the audience's judgment.

I get emotional about the appeal to emotions.

That was a little joke.

There is little point getting annoyed by logical fallacies.

The important reason to recognize them

is to avoid them

in our own thinking.

They are all traps

that keeps us from seeing the errors

in our own thoughts.

I argue with myself

way more than I argue

with everyone else, combined.

Arguing with myself,

using fallacies,

just wastes my time.

--

Regards,

John Popelish

It is a tie, argumentum ad ignorantiam and argumentum ad populum, are the ones that annoy me the most, followed closely by argument from personal incredulity.

I would like to point out how many answers demonstrate that most on this site have no understanding of the logical fallacies. They are suggesting some conclusions are fallacies, while the conclusions may be fallacious, its the arguments that they are based on that are the "logical fallacies."

I am just astounded by the incredible mind-reading superpowers of Yahoo’s Religion and Spirituality community.

GODDIDIT and GODMUSTADONEIT are my favorites.

I call those Correlation/Causation Fallacies ..

Logical fallacies are thinking quirks... With lots missing...

Speaking as someone who's both a former Christian and a former atheist..? I really f*cking hate the No True Scotsman fallacy! For utterly personal reasons. :S

I haven't developed a list and grading system for logical fallacies. And I've seen someone else's list . . . it is WAY too long.

This is really odd: It is apparent that the common Democrat online uses the same method as the atheists do here. They blatantly lie about something. It's a behavioral trait, easily spotted, but both groups do it consistently. As if there was some advantage to gain by doing it. Logical Fallacy, sure, but rhetoric, perhaps designed in hope of people believing it.

So what is a Logical Fallacy? According to this source:

A logical fallacy is an error in reasoning that renders an argument invalid. Also called a fallacy, an informal logical fallacy, and an informal fallacy. In a broad sense, all logical fallacies are nonsequiturs—arguments in which in which a conclusion doesn't follow logically from what preceded it.

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-logical-fallacy-...

One that comes to mind is this:

Me: I believe in Jesus Christ, and the salvation he brings to me.

Atheist: You are a LIAR!

What am I lying about? Jesus Christ, my belief? That he brought me salvation? What? Which? ALL of it? No, that's not true, I really believe it.

Charles Darwin's false theory of evolution.