No problem:

First of; here’s where I primarily source my definitions from, just so you can read along. But you can find similar wording elsewhere.

Now, quoting just your latest reply where you deny using ad hominems-

“dumb-dumb,” “dumb idiot liar,” “babybrain,” “stupid dumbass fucking bullshit lies,” “only fucking morons would believe…”

These are all “Abusive ad hominem / name-calling” because they target my intelligence, character and credibility rather than my claims.

“Let me know when you have a fourth … piece of evidence so I can take your argument seriously”; “you keep trying to high road lies”

Here you’re “Poisoning The Well” by trying to discredit any future claims or arguments I might bring.

“hope you get that Israel money or whatever you’re in this for”; “like a foreign agent”

Here you’re applying a “Circumstantial Ad Hominem” by bringing in something irrelevant to the discussion, and sprinkling it with some “Bare Assertion Fallacy” given that you’ve given no basis for assuming that I’m allied with Israel or any other foreign power.

regurgitate … from your master”; “Israel money”; “foreign agent”

Here you’re imploying the “Guilt by Association / Bias And Hominem” fallacy by discredit anything I say based on the same previous “Bare Assertion Fallacy”.

You are doing a fallacy where you think my calling you a dumb idiot liar somehow negates all the points…”

Here you’re abusing the “Tu Quoque / Appeal To Hypocrisy” fallacy by trying to claim that I do not understand the fallacies I mentioned, rather than engage with the actual points. It’s also fallacious because my appeal to toning down the personal attacks on your comments came after I responded to your actual points.

You also employed a few other non-ad hominem fallacies: a Straw man, an Appeal to Ridicule, A Red Herring / Irrelevant Conclusion as well as general Bullying / Intimidation (which is rhetorical and not strictly logical).

And that was just in this last message.