It appears you don't know the meaning of the term "change of subject".
If you make an assertion, and an argument is made against it, and you reply with an unrelated assertion you are changing the subject. That's true even if one or more of your assertions are correct (a highly dubious possibility in your case), and even if the new idea is more important than the old one.
You appear to never stick to any specific subject when someone nails you with facts or solid logic. You do stick to general themes, such as "the war is a disaster", but if you say the war is a disaster because of X, and someone shows X is not true, and then you say "well the war is a disaster because of Y, and someone shows that Y is not true, you just change around to "the war if a disaster because of Z, and never deal with X and Y being wrong. Then later you go back to asserting X and Y, as if they where established proven facts, rather then unsupported, or even clearly false ideas. |
