Hey Statistics experts, I cannot think of the name for it but what would be the inverse of "survivor bias"? As in, it's not "you think the poison isn't deadly because you only see survivors" but "you think the fertilizer works because you don't see the dead plants".
No, not quite. That says you assume something is false because you lack the knowledge to know it's false. It's similar but this is more like you assume something is working because you only see where it's working? I guess it's a specific class of that kind of fallacy.