Logical Fallacy of Ad Hominem Ridicule

The Logical Fallacy of Ad Hominem Ridicule occurs when an appeal to ridicule fallacy is committed where the person is ridiculed rather than the idea. The appeal to ridicule fallacy occurs when ridicule or humor is used rather than rational thinking.

No one who has an actual reason for what they believe has any reason to use ad hominem ridicule. Ridicule is usually a way to cover for the fact that there is no basis for belief. All fallacies ar based on either infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem of human thinking that destroys all possibility of sound reasoning in a secular mind is known as Agrippa's trilemma.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Ad Hominem Ridicule

Bill Nye arguing against Creation science:"Ken Ham and his followers have this remarkable view of a worldwide flood that somehow influenced everything that we see in nature. Five-hundred-foot wooden boat, eight zoo-keepers for 14,000 individual animals, every land plant in the world under water for a full year. I ask us all, is that really reasonable?"

There is no clearly stated conclusion, but there is innuendo, an implied conclusion. Consider what Bill might be trying to imply. He is probably trying to say that the Genesis Flood never happened. If the Flood never happened, then it would be difficult to say that God reveals through the Bible. When we hear this kind of claim that has such far-reaching consequences, we need to thoroughly sort through his arguments and any evidence presented to see if there is any truth to it.

At the same time, we know that God speaks to us through the Bible and that He is constantly showing us great and mighty things that we don’t know. For that reason, we know that Bill is wrong to imply that the Flood didn’t happen in the way the God tells us that it did. As you will see, Bill’s errors are very obvious. However, there may be a deception coming that is not so obvious. You must have a strong relationship with Christ so that you can discern between clever lies and truth.

In the words, "Ken Ham and his followers," Bill Nye is using the logical fallacy of the implied lie. It is a lie by innuendo instead of stating the lie clearly as:

Ken Ham and a small group of people believe the Bible as it is written. No one else in all the world believes what God says through the Bible. Ken Ham claims that the worldwide Flood moved the stars around and changed the laws of physics.

Stating it clearly would sound ridiculous and would be easily recognized as a straw man fallacy, so Bill uses innuendo. Then, if anyone questions Bill, innuendo gives him a built-in hedge, so he can claim that this is not what he meant.

Bill Nye is marginalizing and using a bandwagon fallacy. Bill makes Bible-believers sound like a strange group hiding out in the woods--almost dangerous. Why would Bill Nye use such verbiage?

Bill Nye is also using the ad hominem fallacy to try to portray Ken Ham as someone very weird, a sort of guru over a cult of followers. This was not a slip of the tongue but became a mantra of Bill Nye's throughout the debate. It is a tactic that works on some people just like bullying works on the playground. This is a kind of demonizing rather than dealing rationally with the subject at hand.

As a side note, according to recent polls, about 46 percent of Americans believed in Creation by God, 32 percent believed in Theistic Evolution and only 15 percent believed, as Bill Nye believes, in the Molecules-to-Man story without any Divine intervention. The creationists surveyed are largely productive contributors to society, and many are scientists in such fields as chemistry, physics, engineering, medicine, etc. (source) This only proves that Bill is telling an untruth. It doesn’t prove the Creation-Flood Model. The bandwagon fallacy can’t prove the Creation-Flood Model any more than this fallacy can prove the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story. It is only what has been revealed about the Creation-Flood Model that is proven and the fact that God says so is the proof. We ought to rejoice, though, that such a large portion of the population of the United States is resistant to brain-washing.

When Bill Nye says, “this remarkable view of a worldwide flood that somehow influenced everything that we see in nature.” this is part of a complex fallacy. By mixing several fallacies, Bill is able to confuse his listeners. If what Bill says, “influenced everything that we see in nature,” were not a straw man fallacy, then it would truly be a remarkable view. In fact, the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story is a remarkable view, since it violates so many scientific laws. The idea that the Genesis Flood affected the entire world would be expected; however, it certainly didn’t influence everything that we see in nature.