Post hoc fallacy: Just because Event A happened before Event B, you assume that Event A caused Event B.
Non sequitur fallacy: This is an even more illogical connection of cause/effect, in which Event A clearly has nothing to do with Event B. The evidence offered does not support the conclusion that is reached.
Ad hominem argument:You attack the person instead of the person's argument or point of view on a subject.
Appeal to questionable or faulty authority: citing an authority who may not have expertise on the subject or using phrasing like "Sources close to . . . " or "Experts claim. . . ."
Begging the question: Asking the reader to assume that something is true without proving it first--especially flawed if that "something" is controversial.
False analogy: You assume that because two things share some characteristics, they are alike in all respects.
Either/Or Fallacy: You assume that taking a certain viewpoint or course of action will result in one of two diametrically opposed outcomes (no other outcomes possible).
Red herring argument: You intentionally digress from the real issue being discussed, introducing a side issue that has nothing to do with the real issue under discussion--in an attempt to remove attention from the real issue.
Sweeping or hasty generalization: You've reached a conclusion based on only a little evidence that might be relevant but is not typical.
Card stacking: If someone says, "The cards were stacked against me," the speaker is saying he/she was never given a fair chance. This is a complicated one--one side may distort evidence or facts presented, suppress evidence, oversimplify or even suppress facts, etc.
There are many, many different types of logical fallacies. These are just a few.