click here to learn more about being redeemed from sin and set free to serve God in spirit and in truth. click here to learn more about holiness click here to learn more about being changed into the same image click here to learn more about sowing and reaping click here to learn more about the free gift of righteousness. click here to learn more about how faith gives us access to grace and grace does the works. click here to learn more about faith and how it comes. click here to learn more about acknowledging Jesus click here to learn more about how God speaks Who will you listen to?  Click here to learn more. click here to learn more about the pattern of God. click here to learn more about the pattern of God for individuals, marriage, and family. click here to learn more about the pattern of God for the local church click here to learn more about the Church universal
SeekFind Logo Menu

Logical Fallacy of Proof by Implied Unsupported Assertion / Implied Lie


Logical Fallacy of Proof by Implied Unsupported Assertion / Implied Lie

Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known; however, that is not true. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. Science is limited only to pragmatic thinking because of the weakness of human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Proof by implied unsupported assertion, a form of axiomatic thinking, is one of these three unhappy possibilities.

The logical fallacy of proof by implied unsupported assertion or implied lie occurs when making the false or unsupported assertion directly would be unacceptable, but making it by innuendo allows a way out if called on the tactic. It is a form of hedging. By using innuendo, it is possible to sometimes tell a very bold outright lie without being detected.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Implied Unsupported Assertion / Implied Lie

Bill Nye: "Ken Ham and his followers have this remarkable view of a worldwide flood that somehow influenced everything that we see in nature."

This was a verbal tactic, a logical fallacy of proof by implied unsupported assertion or implied assertion contrary to fact (outright lie), that Bill Nye wove into his messages throughout his 2014 debate with Ken Ham. This is a nested fallacy, stacking more than one fallacy in only a few words, a practice that makes it more difficult to sort out the fallacy. The phrase, "Ken Ham and his followers," repeated in various forms throughout the debate, has the purpose of painting anyone who believes what God says through the Bible as being a very small band of renegades who are following Ken Ham. It paints Ken Ham as a cult leader. This is very nuanced, so it creates the impression without raising resistance. When combined with another, more outrageous, lie, this lie will tend to be accepted without conscious evaluation by many. And if anyone calls Bill out on this, he will simply deny that this was his intent, because he has used hedging. The phrase, "this remarkable view," gives the impression of weirdness to the view that there was a worldwide flood, something that is very difficult to miss in geology. Again, this is all by innuendo rather than direct statement. You would be much more likely to catch the fallacy if Bill were to say, "It is weird to think that there was a flood!" The same would be true if Bill had said, "There is no evidence for the Genesis flood." The evidence for this flood is overwhelming. The remarkable view is the currently held paradigm that the flood didn't occur and that the sedimentary rocks were somehow formed over vast quantities of time. This was followed by a straw man fallacy in the phrase, "of a worldwide flood that somehow influenced everything that we see in nature," is an outright lie that is stated presumptively. Bill Nye is using the logical fallacy of extension, that is, exaggerating in order to make the Biblical account seem to be absurd. You can't tell it yet, since Bill very cleverly planted the seeds of his arguments early in these very vague terms. Later in the debate, he continues to build on the same idea until he finally (much later in the debate) says that the Bible claims that the flood affected the stars. This is an amazing stretch, even for Bill Nye.

Last updated: Sep, 2014
How God Will Transform You - FREE Book  

Bread Crumbs

Home     >   Meaning     >   Christian Witness     >   Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies     >   Presumptions, Bare Assertions, and Lies     >   Implied Lie








Toons & Vids



Logical Fallacy of Ipse dixit /Just Because Fallacy / Trust Me / Mother Knows Best Fallacy / Because I Said So / You'll See

Logical Fallacy of Unsupported Assertion / Alleged Certainty / Appeal to Common Sense / Bare Assertion Fallacy / Unprovable Statement / Groundless Claim

Secret Knowledge Fallacy

Allness Fallacy

Autistic Certainty Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Assertion Contrary to Fact / Counterfactual Fallacy / Lie / Untruth

Big Lie Technique / Staying on Message

Logical Fallacy of the Outright Lie / Total Lie

Logical Fallacy of the Bold-Faced Lie / Bald-Faced Lie

Appeal to Confidence

Logical Fallacy of Hypothesis Contrary to Fact / Argumentum Ad Speculum / speculative fallacy /

Logical Fallacy of False Prophecy

Argument to the Future / Escape to the Future

Escape Via Ignorance

Logical Fallacy of Argumentum Ex Culo

Logical Fallacy of Blind Obedience / Blind Authority / Team Player

Logical Fallacy of False Accusation / Finding a Fault Where None Exists / False Conflict / False Error

Argument from Omniscience

Logical Fallacy of Universal Negative

As Far As Anyone Knows Fallacy

Proving a Negative Fallacy / Negative Proof Fallacy

Claim of Unknowables Fallacy

The Logical Fallacy of Presupposition/Assumptive Thinking

Irrelevant Purpose Fallacy

Propositional Fallacy

Thompson Invisibility Syndrome

Logical Fallacy of Presumption

Grammatical Presupposition / Assumptive Language

Arbitrary Thinking

Reversible Logic

Floating Abstraction Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Proof by Implied Unsupported Assertion / Implied Lie

Spiritual Fallacy / Spiritual Excuse

I Wish I Had a Magic Wand Fallacy / Feigned Powerlessness

Pious Fraud

Logical Fallacy of False Open-Mindedness



Answer to Critic

Appeal to Possibility

Circular Reasoning

Argument to the Future

Insignificant Cause

Word Magic

Love Between a Man and Woman


Colossians 2

Righteousness & Holiness

Don't Compromise


Proof by Atheism

Scriptures About Marriage

Genuine Authority

The Reason for Rejecting Truth

Witness on the Internet

Flaky Human Reasoning

How Do You Know?


The Real Purpose of the Church

The Real Purpose of Life

From Glory to Glory

REAL Faith--What it IS & IS NOT

REAL Love--What it IS & IS NOT

How to be Led by God

How to Witness

Wisdom: Righteousness & Reality

Holiness & Mind/Soul

Redemption: Free From Sin

Real Reality

Stories Versus Revelation

Understanding Logic

Logical Fallacies

Circular Reasoning-Who is Guilty?

How Can We Know Anything?

God's Word

God's Process

God's Pattern

Mind Designed to Relate to God

Answers for the Confused

Fossil Record Says: "Creation"

Avoid These Pitfalls

Public School's Religion

Twisting Science


Public School Failures

Twisting History

How can we know anything about anything? That's the real question

more info: mouseover or click

The complexity of Gods Way understood in a single diagram
Obey your flesh and descend into darkness