I’ve decided to compile a list of the most obvious logical fallacies commited by Conservapedia.

So, without further ado…

Fallacy #1: Argumentum ad hominem

Well, let’s see…they say Obama is a Muslim (which is false, and shouldn’t mean anything anyway), and claim, essentially, that he is thus unfit for the presidency. In addition, they repeat the creationist argument about Charles Darwin being racist, as though this is supposed to cast doubt on his conclusions.

Fallacy #2: Quote mining

Hoo boy, just take a look at their page on evolution for a long list of mined quotes.

Fallacy #3: Straw man

Evolution, atheism…need I say more? The linked articles caricature their subjects and then “refute” the caricatures. FAIL.

I could go on and on, but I don’t know if I could last too much longer wandering around in that cesspool of ignorance and illogical thinking. Feel free to inform me of any other fallacies they’ve commited.