If you don't go to a school that usually attracts people with 179s, your LSAT score will put a red flag on your resume: why isn't this guy at Yale?
I stopped reading the thread after this post, but I would agree with this concern. I have experienced similar problems in other arenas where the person making the decision does the math and realizes you probably didn't break a 3.0 in undergrad. Just as they are free to infer that you are especially bright, they can also then infer that you are especially lazy, and there is no forum for you to explain that away until the interview stage (although an "Assumed GPA Discrepancy" addendum on a resume would be entertaining).
Also consider who one would be separating themselves from with the inclusion of an LSAT score. Take someone with a 179. Who are they separating themselves from with that piece of information? Those that scored 170-178? Lawyers (people who have taken an LSAT) understand that the difference in the 170's is minimal and may be more tied to what one ate for breakfast that morning or 3 extra weeks of practice than actual intellectual ability. Is it separating the person who scored a 179 from those that scored in the 160's or below? If so, that has likely been demonstrated by school selection, or should be obviously demonstrated by one's performance in other arenas if the 179er is actually significantly beyond the lower scorers in the capacity to be an effective lawyer.
This is a lot easier to see if one has been working before law school - especially if one has worked for a law firm before. While it is not the end of the world to include this score, the risk will outweigh the possible reward in most situations.