Originally Posted by

**Speakpigeon**
Originally Posted by

**steve_bank**
I'd call it non sequiter. Premis and conclusion not connected logically.

If it is raining cats are dogs.

This isn't anything like an explanation.

You are repeating the commonplace answer as if it was any explanation.

EB

if a=b then 1=2.

if it is raining then the gas tank is full

fido is a dog therefore the cow jumped over the moon

fido is a dog therefore sasha is a cat

non sequitur. No connection between premise and conclusion. That is my explanation. I believe non sequitur is just a formal way of saying nonsense.

As a logician have you Carol's, also a logician, Jaberwoky?