It's much more likely you're misunderstanding their position or missing some undisclosed nuance. Often I find this just comes down to most people lacking the vocabulary or ability to refine their positions consicely enough to form coherent and non contradictory positions.
If you take the time to work through their contrictory statements with them you'll likely find there was no contradiction in their mind, instead, there was just some nuance that got lost in translation.
There are a lot of stupid people in the world, but most of them are able to see reason if a) they're willing, and b) you're willing to help them get there.
The problem is that you're probably not going to get the answer you want so you have little incentive to put in the effort.
When someone is being truly genuine, I do not believe you will find that contradiction. It is possible that you may not have entirely understood what they have written, and looking for clarification may be worthwhile. Still, given the above, it is not likely worth your time. In places where there is incentive to be genuine, more exploration can be worth it.
That said, I try to suspend my disbelief regarding the impossibility of fighting the current and so try to be a good citizen in order to maintain a good city. I'm sure Plato or Kant or has written extensively about this, and dang seemed to approve when I discussed it with him in a separate venue.
So now that I've spent lots of years lurking, some more years posting and plenty of time screaming into the darkness elsewhere, I can feel satisfied if I post something that I know is interesting or helpful, even if I don't get any external feedback.
(I'm reminded of the whole descent-to-madness that certain areas have academia have undergone for the sake of bibliometrics. See e.g. Peter Higgs' comments: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-... )