I'm a PhD student in computer science. I'm currently working with 2 co-authors in revising a paper for resubmission (I'm not the main author). They act very respectful and open to criticism, but they seem to dismiss my concerns without realizing that they are doing it. I'm going to use a fictional example to illustrate the spirit of our conversations:
Me: "I don't think 2+2=5 as you said."
Them: "But we've addressed that concern before. Maybe you should explain yourself better so that we can understand."
Me: "I've already explained it 10 times in different emails and in person. There was even a claim that said 2=1 that I refuted."
Them: "We're not doubting your arguments but we need some time to figure out if that's true. Now let's consider 2+2=5... Oh, yeah, if 2=1 turns out to be true, then..."
At that point, it would make sense to me to ask about how I refuted 2=1. They want it to be true, I'm saying it's false, but they go on with their own trains of thought, assuming it's true. If someone in your team has a piece of information that can be decisive for something you are very interested in knowing, why would you ignore it? I've been told I have to learn how to explain why something is important in order to get my message across, but in this case it is important for everyone (and they know that) and yet they are not willing to make an effort to understand. They have even told me that they have answered my questions when in fact they haven't, and then I have to explain what it is that they don't understand and why, and it's getting frustrating.
1) Am I doing something wrong? How can I tell if it's a lack of skill on my part or laziness on theirs?
2) How can I refuse to collaborate on future works with the same team? I have a feeling that they will ask me to prove that it's not my fault and will keep arguing that this "happens all the time when doing research".