Does the birther movement create the need for a new type of fallacious argument?

[ck4829]

Here are the arguments that the birthers use pretty much all of the time.

Example 1:
We are told that there is a "whitey" tape
There is no evidence of said tape
Therefore, Obama must be hiding the tape

Example 2:
We are told that Obama is not a natural born citizen
There is no evidence that Obama is not a natural born citizen
Therefore, what is Obama hiding?

I took logic as a class in College, I know that the two examples above are fallacious arguments. But I can't classify what kind of fallacies they are.

Can you identify the fallacy above, or could it be a new fallacy?

If so, I propose "Argument from Supposed Lack of Evidence".

[parasim]

1. the problem with Example 2, is that there is evidence.

He has already shown his BC, for instance.

[YOY]

2. How many of them are religious nutbags to boot.

Being a religious nutbag/literalist and following that arguement go hand-in-hand.

The humorous thing being that they have actually been given the information they seek...they just don't like the answer...so they persist.

[Critters2]

3. I'm no expert, but I think these fall under the category of a "negative proof fallacy".

You can't prove the argument wrong, so it must be true.

[napi21]

4. If we all, including the media stop talking about it, it will go away!

All they/re looking for is publicity to keep their nutty story alive!

[Brother Buzz]

5. Denial of the antecedent

[louis-t]

6. "Obama-UNSEAL YOUR RECORDS!1!1!!"

:rofl:

[Bonhomme Richard]

7. These people are complete morons. Just tell them.....

that what they said is the dumbest thing you have ever heard and you won't waste a minute to respond to suck craziness.
They want you to engage them. Don't give them the satisfaction.
Then they can go back to kicking their dog.