distraction

Consider a disagreement with a scarecrow. The scarecrow will not argue back; therefore, you are free to argue about anything you want. Furthermore, you can alter its argument so that you can more easily defeat it, and it cannot object to the change. To defeat the scarecrow's argument, you can change it any way you like so that you can easily light the straw man on fire and consume him.

A straw man argument is essentially a made-up argument that doesn't really exist.

This logic fallacy is a type of Ad Hominem Fallacy in which the other person avoids the question by shifting the blame onto you.  Have you ever tried to help someone, only for them to turn it back on you? Usually, it stems from a guilty mind attempting to rationalise actions for which they lack a strong defence.  This fallacy also occurs when someone claims that two wrongs make a right.

This is where someone avoids answering the question or discussing the topic by trying to embarrass you and try to get you to defend your position. If you have other people present, then they may try to discredit you and, therefore, your message in the other hearer's eyes. They do this by trying to attack you personally instead of dealing with the topic at hand.  This tactic is known in Latin as an "ad hominem attack" ("to the man").  The other person appeals to emotions and not logic or truth. Another type of attack could be "gas lighting."

The first logical fallacy is known as the "red herring." The "red herring" occurs when someone is discussing a question or topic, but the other person has sidestepped it by bringing up an irrelevant topic to divert your attention. People often end up debating this alternative, irrelevant topic instead of the original one.  Often, people employ this strategy without consciously recognising it. Either the person does not think logically by nature, or it is an inbuilt defence mechanism. Otherwise, it is a cunning diversion to get you off track.