What logical fallacy can lead to conclusions based on irrelevant information?

The red herring fallacy is a distraction that leads the discussion away from the original topic by introducing irrelevant information. This can result in conclusions that do not logically follow from the evidence presented, as the focus shifts from the relevant issue to a different, often unrelated, point. For example, if a conversation about climate change shifts to discussing unrelated statistics about crime rates, it creates confusion and diverts attention from the main argument, leading to conclusions that may ignore critical aspects of the original issue.

The other fallacies, while also related to faulty reasoning, operate in different ways. The straw man misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack, a false analogy draws misleading parallels between unrelated situations, and hasty generalization jumps to conclusions based on insufficient evidence. Each of these fallacies has distinct characteristics, but the red herring specifically focuses on distracting from the argument at hand by introducing irrelevant information.