PH usually says he does it for the lurkers. I don't disagree, but I don't think there are too many lurkers out there who need help.
I ignore the hard core cases and look for the "softer" ones, where an intelligent discourse may have some impact. Unfortunately the "virtual ignore" list is quite long.
It is very difficult for me to accept that people who are purposely ignorant can sleep at night, but I am apparently wrong.
My personal opinion is that a thread can have a lot of lurkers during the first 50 posts. Some may plow through the first 100, but not that many. That's why I usually don't deploy the ping list if I learn of a thread after it's past that point. After 100 posts, it's just too late to argue with a creationist, or even to post a link with the correct information. The lurkers aren't there to benefit, and for sure the creationist won't benefit. But sometimes I do it.
I agree completely. But, the longer I'm here, the more I find that it may be futile to think that any good can come of it. They're going to remain ignorant, and take down people's opinion of conservatives and Republicans with them.
A few weeks ago, a woman I work with found out I'm a Republican and in the conversation I mentioned I was going to NYC to see the Darwin exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History (I highly recommend it, by the way), and she actually had to ask whether I was "anti-Darwin." I had to explain that, no, I am not one of those people.
Point being, that to the great moderate, undecided middle, "conservative" and "Republican" is becoming synonymous with "anti-evolution" and, therefore, "anti-science." That's bad news. I guess, if nothing else, posting here shows that not all conservatives and Republicans have this blind spot to rationalism in our thinking.