Conservatism is the mother of all sins.

But on the other hand, it can be argued that innovative approaches have advanced the world, and conservatism has not advanced anything. So even if it was not done from an innovative approach, practically new things have advanced the world while conservatism has not (I hope I am understood)

Not true. Sometimes innovation promoted it and sometimes conservatism. Therefore, I see no point or value in discussing conservatism and innovation. These are two idiotic approaches that prioritize a priori considerations over substantive considerations.

Can the Rabbi give an example of where conservatism has advanced? Because I really can't think of anything like that in opposition to liberalism and innovation (women's rights to better democracy, equality before the law, science, technology, the State of Israel, and many more).

For example, the government model that used to be that there was a king who usually had an heir, conservatives come and say that it has always been like this and that is how it should remain, as opposed to liberals who try to explain that it is immoral, inappropriate, not equitable and that we need to move to another model (democracy). In short, I have not yet found a single good thing about conservatism, and I would be happy if the rabbi would open my eyes.

Before the examples, I will explain to you why you are necessarily wrong. According to you, in every situation x where there is a proposal to move to situation y and a proposal to stay in x, it is better to move to y. Do you understand that this is futile? If x is better than y, it would be better to preserve and not change.
The survival of the Jewish people is largely based on its conservatism. Science is based on a built-in conservatism without which there would be no science. Alternatively, pseudoscience (like alternative medicine) is always based on innovation, a proposal to change the scientific situation. By the way, scientific conservatism is to oppose such proposals, for example.
Well, as I said, this discussion is worthless and pointless in my opinion. I suggest we end it.

Oh, and liberals really don't say change all the time, but they usually try to change according to reality and enlightened Western values, unlike conservatives who try to preserve whatever they want.

Quite the opposite - conservatism advocates a suspicious approach to changes and their implementation in a careful and slow manner to ensure that the benefits of the change outweigh the harm, in contrast to innovators who see the change itself as good and therefore should be promoted with all their might, without taking into account the harm that will be caused.

The innovators' approach is that once change has become the norm, it must be changed, because only conservatives believe in preserving it...

(And by the way, the examples you gave illustrate the problem with your approach, for example, cautious feminism is good because it grants rights to women, but the feminism that exists today pushes women to be equal to men, thereby putting heavy pressure on them, harming relationships and destroying the lives of women and men alike. It's not for nothing that women's happiness indices have been clearly declining in the last 40 years. There's no need to elaborate on the LGBT approach that breaks up the family, the birthrate and society in general and catapults mental health problems among youth to alarming levels. If you think it's good, there may be no point in discussing it.)