Similar to the false dichotomy fallacy, I find that the main problem Young Earth Creationists have – and even the mainstream religious – is that many of their arguments require a grand leap to reach their conclusion.
I will give an example: A common Creationist argument is the receding moon argument, where they claim that a few thousand years ago the moon would have been inside the earth, due to the fact that it has been receding since it was first ‘created.’ Ignoring the fact that the moon was not receding at a constant rate, which debunks the argument, the conclusion of the Creationist logic is that science is wrong and therefor the Bible is correct. Notice the jump?
Another example is the claim that the universe had to have a cause. Ignoring the fact that we don’t know this for sure, how come that cause is God? Why does it have to be a divine being, and more specifically, the Christian one?
If a supposed miracle happens, how does this prove the Bible to be true? This ‘jumping to conclusions’ logic is a major issue. Furthermore, it is commonly and happily used when someone has to try and rationalize a fact so that it is compatible with their religious beliefs. Such a thing happened when the age of the earth was discovered, and when scientific theories such as evolution were proven. It was quickly asserted that God ‘used’ evolution, or ‘set off’ the Big Bang. Even today this rationalization process is used by some apologists to explain natural disasters.
Not much to write about with this observation, but nevertheless it is an issue when trying to make religious arguments.
Image courtesy of artur84 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net