1. This first argument is invalid because it displays an act of genetic fallacy. Genetic fallacy is seen in this argument because it states that the study “has to be wrong, because the study was funded by a number of electric car corporations that have a biased perspective on the issue." Which shows that they are discrediting an argument based solely on its source.
2. This argument is invalid because it shows of an appeal to ignorance. In the argument, it states that "There is no evidence of his guilt, so he must be innocent." Due to claiming that he must be innocent because of the lack of evidence they are saying that a claim is true only because it has yet to be proven false. Thus employing an appeal to ignorance.
3. This argument is invalid
2. This argument is invalid because it shows of an appeal to ignorance. In the argument, it states that "There is no evidence of his guilt, so he must be innocent." Due to claiming that he must be innocent because of the lack of evidence they are saying that a claim is true only because it has yet to be proven false. Thus employing an appeal to ignorance.
3. This argument is invalid