Please answer this question…
In your own words:
I repeat - inheritance has absolutely nothing to do with coupling, therefore it is quite wrong to say that inheritance automatically produces tight coupling.
and
Neither of those articles put “inheritance” and “coupling” in the same sentence, so they are not related. Your article does not mention inheritance at all.
and
I understand that inheritance has absolutely nothing to do with coupling. Coupling only comes into play when one module calls another, not when one class inherits from another.
“So they are not related”, “inheritance has absolutely nothing to do with coupling”, “it is quite wrong to say that inheritance automatically produces tight coupling.”
Robert C. Martin (Someone you often reference as an authority) says:
One of the problems with implementing an abstract class with inheritance is that the derived class is so tightly coupled to the base class
These opinions are clearly contradictory. Is Robert C. Martin wrong or are You?
You’ll probably try to claim that that somehow the statements don’t contradict each other but that would be a flat out lie. as it’s cut and dry. You can’t even weasel your way out and erroneously claim that it doesn’t apply to abstract classes because he mentions them specifically 
And remember this: If you say uncle bob is wrong, anywhere else you’ve cited him as an example to back up your claims becomes invalid because clearly he’s not an authoritative source.
You’re clearly wrong here. Admit it and I’ll let it go.
More importantly, what this does prove is that you don’t know what coupling is which invalidates any argument you have made on the subject of DI, singletons singletons and to a lesser extent TDD as understanding the pros/cons of them relies on a understanding of coupling.