irrelevance

Irrelevance crops up in many arguments:

When the argument itself seems logical, yet the conclusion is not relevant to or supported by the line of argument, then the fallacy is ignoratio elenchi (ignorance of the issue). Such problems may occur when the arguer is not responding to the actual question posed.

When the line of argument is off-target for the topic under discussion and distracts from the real topic, then the arguer has tossed a red herring into debate in order to create a smokescreen.

Irrelevant attacks on the arguer or cited authority are ad hominem fallacies. However, if the "authority" who/that has been cited fails as a legitimate authority on one or more grounds, then disputing the expertise or credibility of that person/reference is not an ad hominem fallacy.

Logic and emotion are often at odds. When irrelevant appeals to emotion are incorporated into arguments, then the conclusions drawn by that argument become suspect if the emotion is not specifically related to the topic. To argue that a person will probably enjoy eating chocolate is not necessarily unfounded, though it would not be relevant to discussion about chicken pot pie.

red herrings

Red Herring, Smoke Screen, Wild Goose Chase

The red herring is a diversionary tactic that distracts the opponent away from the real point under discussion. Red herring topics are irrelevant to the point under discussion, and serve to take the heat off an already weak argument.

Because creationists and advocates of intelligent design theory are arguing for a discredited, untenable position, they must resort to debating tactics such as the red herring.

Godwin's Law and Desperate Attacks on Darwinism

"Author and Christian broadcaster Dr. D. James Kennedy connects the dots between Charles Darwin and Adolf Hitler in Darwin’s Deadly Legacy, a groundbreaking inquiry into Darwin’s chilling social impact.

The program features 14 scholars, scientists, and authors who outline the grim consequences of Darwin’s theory of evolution and show how his theory fueled Hitler’s ovens. " Reported on ChristianNewsWire, Aug. 18, 2006.

"Chilling social impact" and "fueled Hitler’s ovens"?!

Charles Darwin was a natural historian who carefully examined the fossil evidence and formulated a mechanism to explain the observed temporal alteration in life forms. Darwin also correctly predicted that his formulations would excite the ire of fellow scientists of religious persuasion. Within a decade, almost all European scientists had accepted Darwin's ideas.

Not so in segments of American society, where attacks on any evidence counter to dogmatic belief in Biblical literacy not only flourish, but are given undeserved media attention. Such illogical and emotion-driven attempts to discredit Darwin reflect back upon the accusers, drawing attention to the weakness of their arguments and their lack of genuine grounds for criticism of the modern synthesis of evolutionary theories.

"“The legacy of Charles Darwin,” said Dr. Kennedy, is “millions of deaths, the destruction of those deemed ‘inferior,’ the devaluing of human life, and increasing hopelessness. Darwin’s legacy has been deadly indeed.”"

Power-mongering based on emotional thinking – Aryans are superior, die Juden are to blame – was responsible for eugenics-as-conducted-in-das-Reich and the holocaust. Distorting history in order to defame the first reasonable scientific explanation for the fact of biological evolution is yet another example of emotional thinking because it is clearly biased and irrelevant. Such association fallacies as these run counter to educated understanding of sociopolitical and psychological mechanisms.