Atheism and the existence of peanut butter

[vulcanlogician]

This is one of the things in logic that many theists seem not to notice.

A valid syllogism is only as good as the soundness of the evidence fed into it.

It is quite easy to create a valid logical argument, that does not demonstrate a thing.

Major Premise:  A bishop can only move diagonally.

Minor Premise:  The Pope is the Bishop of Rome.

Conclusion:  Therefore, the Pope can only move diagonally.

Maybe we should start a sticky thread on silly syllogisms?  (Some theists may try to "save" the above syllogism by invoking some sort of conformal geometry to say that the Pope does, in fact, move diagonally, if only by a "miracle.")

Y'know, I've always felt that bishops only being only to move diagonally made them somewhat suspect.

Diagonal motion is how the common man kills. Yet, this is the only way the bishops can move at all.