False Criteria Fallacy / Fallacy of Questionable Criteria

The fallacy of questionable criteria 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. 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 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.

The False Criteria Fallacy / Fallacy of Questionable Criteria occurs when irrelevant standards are applied to test the truth or the falsity of a proposition.

Examples of the False Criteria Fallacy / Fallacy of Questionable Criteria

Bill Nye in answer to a question about what would convince him that evolution is not a fact: "if you can find a fossil that has swum between the layers, bring it on. You would change the world."

That is a false test, using questionable criteria. Clams don't actually swim very much. Once anything is buried in mud, it is difficult to swim. However, there are examples of clams moving up through tens of feet of mud. Those organisms in the lower layer of the flood sediments are of the types that are not generally mobile enough to escape, which is exactly what you would expect with a worldwide, catastrophic flood. So, this test is quite deceptive. Bill Nye is using the logical fallacy of the outright lie. Scientists find index fossils in the wrong place all the time, but that changes none of their minds. Once in a while a scientist begins to question  the big-bang-billions-of-years-molecules-to-man story and the assumptions, cherry-picking, etc. that are used in the aging methods, but they lose their jobs or are punished in other ways. Bill is also using the logical fallacy of non sequitur. When Bill Nye brought this up previously, he proposed that the only thing that Ken Ham could do was to prove that clams and microscopic organisms had swum up through the mud that was settling on them. Bill is also using a very common Atheist argument: prove this to me in this specific way or the default is to believe that it is not true. That is the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance and the logical fallacy of proof of falsity by failure to prove.

Sandy: "Prove God to me."

Rocky: "God has made Himself obvious in the things that He has created. In fact, He says that He is known so well through His creation that anyone who refuses to acknowledge Him is without excuse. Not only that, but everyone who seeks Jesus Christ finds Jesus Christ. This is testable. If you really want to know the truth, if you are really searching for goodness and righteousness, then you can come to Him in sincerity, respect, and humility and He will reveal Himself to you. If neither of those options are good enough for you, what kind of proof are you looking for?"

Sandy: "Just show me a miracle or let me see God."

This is a false criteria. The two criteria that Rocky gave are enough. God says that the first one, the evidence for Him that He provides through creation is enough. What Sandy is saying is, "Unless I see a miracle or see God, I am justified in not believing that He exists and in fighting against Him." We see miracles all the time, and Atheists see them too. God doesn't do them on demand like a magician. They are for a purpose. The word, miracle, indicates that God does something unexpected. However, even if someone were raised from the dead (which God does from time to time in answer to prayer), the confirmed Atheist would not believe.

Rocky: "Even if you saw a miracle, you wouldn't submit to God. God says that those who refuse to come to Jesus and submit to Him are resistant because they love darkness rather than light. They don't come because their own works are evil. Guess what? You can't even prove that the Sun exists to someone who wants to be willingly ignorant."

Sandy: "The Sun is a physical entity."

Rocky: "What Sun?"

Sandy: "You know. The big ball in the sky that shines light on everything."

Rocky: "Prove that such a thing exists."

Sandy: "Look in the sky."

Rocky: "Why should I look in the sky at something that doesn't exist? Then I would be just as stupid as you for believing in the Sun."

Sandy: "Don't be ridiculous. The Sun exists."

Rocky: "If it exists, then prove it's existence."

Sandy: "I could show you thousands of peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals that reference the Sun."

Rocky: "Why should I believe some things that are written in these journals?"

Sandy: "Because they are written by scientists--really smart people."

Rocky: "Prove to me that those scientific journals are trustworthy and without error."

Sandy: "I never said they were without error, but you can trust them."

Rocky: "They have errors and I should trust them? Give me a break."

Etc., etc., etc.