You're wrong here. It's an arguing technique known as the 'Gish Gallop'. You make a huge number of random, bollox claims, which cost you nothing in terms of time and effort. Your opponent then has to spend considerable time and effort refuting each claim, at which point you just make some more. The whole time your opponent is spent refuting the claims, you are controlling the narrative, and the audience grows bored of listening to your opponent talk. And if your opponent refutes just some of the claims, you can use it as evidence that the others must be true, so you tie your opponent's hands into fighting ALL of them, and your opponent is fighting an uphill battle, regardless of the accuracy of the claims. Not engaging is the only way your opponent can win.