In the context of disregarding radar evidence of aerial threats, which fallacy is being demonstrated?

The scenario of disregarding radar evidence of aerial threats illustrates the fallacy of inconceivability. This fallacy occurs when an individual believes that something cannot happen simply because it is difficult for them to imagine or accept it. In this context, the person may dismiss radar evidence because the idea of an aerial threat feels too implausible or frightening to consider, even when there is reliable evidence to the contrary.

This response effectively captures a cognitive bias where personal belief or emotional reluctance leads to the dismissal of factual inputs. It highlights how people's perceptions can significantly distort their acceptance of reality, particularly in high-stakes situations involving safety and security.