Page history
February 5, 2025
December 2, 2021
December 1, 2021
September 9, 2020
June 30, 2020
January 11, 2020
→Argument from silence
m+2
→Proof by numbers: minor corrections
m+18
→Proof by numbers: the converse argument that adherents to a minority belief are ipso facto right because their position is unpopular, controversial, ridiculed, denounced and persecuted
+387
January 10, 2020
December 27, 2019
It’s possible for the conclusion of a formal logical fallacy to be true by happenstance. See Affirming the consequent for an example.
-213
→Equivocation: parallelism
m-1
December 24, 2019
September 12, 2019
September 7, 2019
→Argument from silence: added Confirmation bias
+22
→Argument from silence
m+18
→Argument from silence: summarized conclusion re absense of evidence of apostasy as general principle - "Conclusive evidence of absence is absence of conclusive evidence."
+211
September 6, 2019
→Argument from silence: added articulation of general prinicple "The compelling weight of conclusive evidence supporting absence of any evidence of a removal of evidence is strong evidence that no evidence was removed."
+404
→Argument from silence
m→Argument from silence: conclusion of Prostestant and Mormon apologists that total historical silence re evidence of original Protestant or Mormon theology was removed by a Catholic cover-up
+70
→Argument from silence: mentioned lack of support for the assertion of a fundmental paradigm shift in doctrine
m+77
→Argument from silence
m+69
→Argument from silence: added "because there is no evidence that it did"
+41
→Argument from silence: added reference to Memory hole and Revisionism re absence of supporting evidence of Protestant and Mormon theology in the first four centuries of Christianity
+45
→Argument from silence: argument that the utter historical silence of any supporting extant evidence of Protestant or Mormon theology is evidence that a monstrous apostasy must have occurred.
+728
September 3, 2019
April 15, 2019
December 4, 2018
→Genetic fallacy: We have an article on this.
+34
→Appeal to Consequences: explained why not
+65
→Special pleading: internal link to distinction without a difference
m+37
→Straw man: clarified to exclude instances in which person A actually did say what was attributed to him, which would not be an example of this fallacy
+196
→Appeal to Consequences: another example
+250
September 11, 2018
September 7, 2018
April 9, 2018
April 6, 2018
August 22, 2017
April 22, 2017
April 21, 2017
November 4, 2016
September 10, 2016
→Appeal to Consequences: clear up wording, remove non-sequitur, remove unneeded third example
m-218
→Appeal to pity: premise and conclusion reversed, 'merican spelling
m-1