Is there a fallacy in this?

[unsorted]

Here's a quote from one of the rescued Chilean miners today:

"I have been with God and with the Devil. I seized the hand of God, it was the best hand. I always knew God would get us out of there".

Also, here is an article about rival churches claiming credit for the rescue.

Is there a fallacy here? I can see that it's fallacious reasoning - the rescue has been successful, so they are saying God did it. If the rescue hadn't worked out, they'd be keeping quiet. But is there a "proper" logical fallacy here - i.e. can we give it a name?

[Ajita Kamal]

I can see at least 3 fallacies:
1. Cherry-picking of anecdotal evidence.
2. Post-hoc ergo propter hoc, confusing between causation and correlation, leading the claimants to conclude that the miners were rescued because of their prayers.
3. The sharpshooter fallacy, also known as the Texas sharpshooter fallacy, where you simply draw the bullseye around the entry hole after firing the shot. Whatever happens, god can be worked into the equation. God gets credit for taking the miners into his kingdom in heaven if they die, and for saving their lives if they live.

The cherry-picking here is a form of inductive fallacy. This is interesting because scientific logic involves a significant amount of inductive reasoning. This is why scientific results have degrees of confidence. In a proper case of inductive reasoning, multiple tests (cases) of the same problem must demonstrate that the correlation is not merely caused by chance. Here they conclude that prayers worked because of one case where the miners were rescued, forgetting about all the dead miners for whom also there were many prayers uttered.