Compose an argument against taking actions to address white-nose syndrome that contains at least three logical fallacies, and identify each logical fallacy you employed.

White-nose syndrome is a fungal disease that affects hibernating bats. It's caused by the fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans and has led to a significant decline in bat populations in North America. The syndrome is a serious threat to bats as it disrupts their hibernation cycle, making them more susceptible to starvation and death.

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning or logic that can undermine the strength of an argument. There are various types of logical fallacies, such as ad hominem, straw man, false cause, appeal to ignorance, and slippery slope, among others.

Following is an argument against taking actions to address white-nose syndrome, with incorporated logical fallacies: 1. "If we start taking actions against white-nose syndrome, then soon we will have to invest resources in saving each and every species, leading to the unnecessary diversion of resources from essential human activities." (Logical fallacy: Slippery Slope) 2. "Scientists are not sure about the long-term implications of white-nose syndrome on the ecosystem, so there's no point in spending time and resources on addressing this issue." (Logical fallacy: Appeal to Ignorance) 3. "A friend of mine who claims to know a lot about white-nose syndrome said that it's just a natural process, and nature will eventually find a balance on its own, so there's no need to worry about it." (Logical fallacy: Appeal to Authority)

In our argument, we have used the following logical fallacies: 1. Slippery Slope: This fallacy occurs when one argues that a single action will lead to a series of events that have a negative outcome, without providing any specific reasons why this series of events will occur. In our argument, we stated that taking action against white-nose syndrome will lead to spending resources on saving all species, although there is no logical connection explaining this progression. 2. Appeal to Ignorance: This fallacy occurs when one argues that something is true because it hasn't been proven false, or that something is false because it hasn't been proven true. In our argument, we said there is no point in taking action against white-nose syndrome because scientists are unsure of its long-term implications. However, not knowing the long-term implications does not justify inaction. 3. Appeal to Authority: This fallacy occurs when one uses an authority figure as evidence in an argument, regardless of the authority's relevance or expertise in the subject matter. In our argument, we used a friend who claimed to have knowledge of white-nose syndrome as evidence that it is a natural process, without considering whether the friend had any real expertise regarding the issue.