They may have an answer, but the "logic" behind them is frequently circular/self-referential in nature, and therefore invalid. But it sounds good enough to them so they'll refuse to even think about - let alone acknowledge - the large gaps/leaps in their so-called "reasoning" that so often completely destroy the foundations of their claims.

You're right: they almost always have "an answer" & as long as they're prepared with something to say, then they'll never care about how valid it is. They've got an answer, and that makes 'em right (wingnuts), goddammit!!!