A logical fallacy in which an explanation is given for some phenomenon, but the evidence for the phenomenon is invalid (fake, exaggerated, whatever. See the other logical fallacies).

Example: "The reason he got the highest score on the SAT was that he went through our program." The 5 people who scored better were dismissed as special cases.

To prove the fallacy, show that the evidence for the phenomenon is invalid.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.