|A categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion.||Because all pigs like mud, and no birds are pigs, therefore no birds like mud.|
Case Study One
Conservapedia once had an article devoted to showing a relationship between atheism and obesity. The general idea was that most atheists are obese, and no theists are atheists, and therefore few theists are obese.
Case Study Two
“Since all fish swim, and no human is a fish, therefore no human can swim.”
Keep in mind that a fallacious argument does not entail an erroneous position.