![]() |
![]() |
Misrepresenting the Facts Fallacy |
Misrepresenting the Facts FallacyWhenever 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 problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Misrepresentation of facts is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. The Misrepresenting Fallacy Misrepresenting the Facts: occurs when a claim is supported by a false premise where the premise is based incorrect information. It is a fallacy of misrepresentation. The straw man fallacy is also a fallacy of misrepresentation, but it misrepresents what someone else has said or what they stand for. The misrepresentation of facts fallacy affects the premises because the facts the are behind the premises are misrepresented. All misrepresenting the facts fallacies are counterfactual fallacies, but some counterfactual fallacies affect the premises and some counterfactual fallacies are given without any premises. Examples of Misrepresenting the Facts Fallacy
There are unsupported assertions based on unwarranted extrapolation and presupposed assumptions in this statement. The fact that is misrepresented is in this part of the statement: ". . . the information that you use to create your worldview is not consistent with what I as a reasonable man would expect." The fact that is misrepresented is that the Bible is not consistent with what a reasonable man would expect. There is also a second misrepresented fact in that Bill, as an unreasonable and dogmatic man misrepresents himself as a reasonable man. A reasonable man would not use fallacies. And a reasonable man would not commit the reasonable man fallacy. What Bill would expect is based on his own worldview. His own inner fake-reality. A reasonable man would realize this and not trust his own thoughts so much without examining the evidence objectively. Bill is being unreasonable in many way as the following shows. There was one kind of cat on the Ark. It might have been a lion. What the cat on the Ark was like, we don't know. By presupposing a lion, Bill is committing a fallacy. OK. Let's imagine for a moment that it was a lion. So let’s assume, just for a moment, that a 21st Century lion was on the Ark. Even if that were true, which is unlikely, Bill Nye is using the logical fallacy of unwarranted extrapolation. This is not what a reasonable man would do. We have no idea what these particular cats were like before the Flood or on the Ark. They would probably have been young adults, but we don't know. We have no idea the extent to which God intervened to keep the animals in control. Perhaps only some animals had fallen to the point of being carnivores at that time, but we don’t know. We have no idea of the design of the cages that Noah may have built. We do know that God gave the design for the Ark and that God did it in such a way that it would work. We know this by revelation. Bible skeptics tend to use a mindset that says, "If I can make any assumptions that would make something in the Bible impossible, that proves that the Bible has an error." That is irrational thinking. When Bill uses the word, “and,” he is using it to connect two thoughts, implying that they make sense together. They don’t make sense together. Here is the logic:
What if they weren't lions? What if they weren't carniverous? What if they were in cages? When Bill says that a reasonable man would not expect what the Bible says, he is using the logical fallacy of unsupported assertion. Just claiming to be the reasonable one and claiming that Ken Ham is not reasonable doesn't make it so. In fact, it's a bit childish. This is the same as saying, "I, Bill Nye, am a reasonable man because I say that I am; therefore, believe me. And anyone who disagrees with me is unreasonable; therefore, don't believe them." and (package deal fallacy) a sane person would not believe the Bible (assertion contrary to fact). Bill Nye is using innuendo to cover a fallacy of unsupported assertion. Bill Nye is assuming that this is really about a comparison of Ken Ham's worldview versus Bill Nye's worldview--except that Bill thinks that his own worldview is real reality and not a worldview/fake-reality at all. Everyone has a worldview, a fake-reality. We all have the problem that our fake-reality seems more real to us than real reality. However,the comparison is between Bill Nye's fake-reality and what God is revealing by Divine revelation. And, the fact is that the physical evidence supports Creation and the Flood much better than it supports the notion that everything made itself. Bill Nye's fake-reality has to explain away several scientific laws. The revelation that God gives has no such problems. There is nothing that is observed scientifically that in any way conflicts with a young Earth, Creation, and the Flood.
While Bill's statement about throwing away ideas taht are not tenable may hold for many things, the discussion is about the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story, as story that is propped up by many fallacies and that survives by intimidation and message control. Bill's performance during the debate is testimony to closed-mindedness. However, the fact is that anyone who challenges this sacred cow of the elite of the "scientific community," will find himself or herself ostracized and fighting to keep his or her job. Bill is totally misrepresting the facts.
Author/Compiler Last updated: Sep, 2014 ![]() Bread Crumbs Main Foundations Home Meaning Bible Dictionary History Toons & Vids Quotations Similar
Logical Fallacy of Proof by Fallacy Proof Surrogate / Evidence Surrogate Error in Observation Misrepresenting the Facts Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Distorted Evidence Logical Fallacy of Unverified Evidence Logical Fallacy of Hysteron Proteron The Logical Fallacy of Unsubstantiated Inference Assuming Facts Not In Evidence Logical Fallacy of Wishful Thinking Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Worldview / Appeal to Fake-Reality / Appeal to Paradigm / Appeal to Confirmation Bias Logical Fallacy of Slippery Slope Logical Fallacy of Limited Scope Logical Fallacy of Mind Reading Logical Fallacy of Shoehorning Logical Fallacy of Confirmation Bias Sacred Cow Fallacy Fantasy Projection / Worldview Projection / Fake-Reality Projection / Paradigm Projection / Context Projection Group Think Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Context Imposition Psychologist's Fallacy The Logical Fallacy ofAmazing Familiarity Stolen Concept Fallacy / Smuggled Concept Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Weak Inference Logical Fallacy of Proof by Theoretical Stories The Logical Fallacy of Anecdotal Evidence Presented as Scientific Evidence / Personal Testimony Presented as Scientific Evidence Logical Fallacy of Dismissing All Personal Testimony Logical Fallacy of Rewriting History / Have it Your Way Logical Fallacy of Proof by Model Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assumption Logical Fallacy of Argument from Personal Incredulity / Personal Belief / Personal Conviction Logical Fallacy of Argument by Lack of Imagination Logical Fallacy of Argument by Imagination The Logical Fallacy of Capturing the Naive / Argumentum ad Captandum / Argumentum ad Captandum Vulgus Logical Fallacy of Argument from Personal Astonishment Logical Fallacy of Special Pleading Logical Fallacy of Variant Imagization Logical Fallacy of Self-Exclusion Logical Fallacy of Unintended Self-Inclusion Ad Personam Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion / Proof by Repeated Assertion Logical Fallacy of Cherishing the Zombie Logical Fallacy of Argumentum Ad Lapidem Logical Fallacy of Proof by Understatement / Misunderstanding by Understatement Logical Fallacy of Proof by Logical Tautology Logical Fallacy of Proof by False Declaration of Victory Logical Fallacy of Assumption Correction Assumption False Criteria Fallacy / Fallacy of Questionable Criteria Logical Fallacy of Cutting Off Discussion / Summary Dismissal Logical Fallacy of Thought-Terminating Cliche / ClicheThinking Logical Fallacy of Truism Logical Fallacy of the Perfect Solution / Nirvana Fallacy / Perfect Solution Fallacy / Perfectionist Fallacy Just In Case Fallacy / Worst Case Scenario Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Unwarranted Extrapolation Logical Fallacy of Untestability Logical Fallacy of Subjectivity / Relativist Fallacy / Subjectivist Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Bizarre Hypothesis/Theory / Far-Fetched Hypothesis/Theory Logical Fallacy of Least Plausible Hypothesis Logical Fallacy of Extravagant Hypothesis / Complex Hypothesis Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Privileging the Hypothesis Logical Fallacy of Canceling Hypotheses Logical Fallacy of Appeal to False Faith Logical Fallacy of False Appeal to Heaven / Appeal to Heaven / Gott Mit Uns / Manfest Destiny / Special Covenant Logical Fallacy of Inaccurate Models Logical Fallacy of Hedging / Having Your Cake / Failure to Assert / Diminished Claim / Failure to Choose Sides / Talking out of Both Sides of Your Mouth / If by Whiskey Preacher's "We" / Salesman's "We" / Politician's "We" Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Nature Logical Fallacy of Experimenter Bias Fallacy of the Crucial Experiment Logical Fallacy of Argument from Hearsay / Telephone Game / Chinese Whispers / Anecdotal Evidence / Volvo Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Ad Hoc Rescue / Ad Hoc Hypothesis The Logical Fallacy of Hindsight Bias / Knew-it-all-Along Effect / Creeping Determinism Logical Fallacy of Continuum / Argument of the Beard / Fallacy of the Beard / Heap Fallacy / Heap Paradox Fallacy / Bald Man Fallacy / Continuum Fallacy / Line Drawing Fallacy / Sorites Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Argument from Fallacy / Argumentum Ad Logicam Logical Fallacy of Inflation of Conflict Logical Fallacy of Infinite Regress / Homunculus Argument The Logical Fallacy of Reification / Anti-Conceptual Mentality Fallacy / Attributing Concreteness to the Abstract / Concretism / Hypostatization Fallacy / Objectification Logical Fallacy of Reification / Personification Logical Fallacy Slothful Induction Logical Fallacy of Superstitious Thinking / Magical Thinking Logical Fallacy of Meaningless Question Logical Fallacy of Proving Non-Existence Argumentum ad Imaginibus Statement of Conversion Fallacy Logical Fallacy of Outdated Information Logical Fallacy of Argument by Laziness Alien Fallacy Quantum Physics Fallacy Fallacious Abstraction Fallacy Appeal to the Untested / Appeal to the Unknown Fallacy Grasping at Straws Appeal to Pragmatism Fallacy / Pragmatic Fallacy / Appeal to Convenience / Pragmatism / Appeal to Utility / Argumentum Ad Convenientiam Appeal to Fake Hope Appeal to Intuition Fallacy Appeal to Mystery Fallacy Argument from Design Fallacy Untestability Fallacy Fallacy of Imaginary Evidence Monopolizing the Question / Hypophora Fallacy of Antecedent / Fallacy of Time Faulty Sign / Faulty Predictor Fallacy Pretentious Antecedent Logical Fallacy of Pretentious Premise Recent
Home Answer to Critic Appeal to Possibility Circular Reasoning Argument to the Future Insignificant Cause Word Magic Love Between a Man and Woman Author/Compiler Colossians 2 Righteousness & Holiness Don't Compromise Sin Proof by Atheism Scriptures About Marriage Genuine Authority The Reason for Rejecting Truth Witness on the Internet Flaky Human Reasoning How Do You Know? Featured
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 Evolutionism Public School Failures Twisting History |
![]() |
![]() |