In a recent DEBATE, two presuppositionalists went up against two atheists. This was a very high paced debate that I would highly recommend listening to; especially those who are unfamiliar with the presuppositionalist position.
From the atheist side, I was very unimpressed. For some reason they felt the carpet bombing debate technique would work. That is, they thew out every objection under the sun while refusing to go into any level of depth. To be honest, The Davinci Code has more substantive arguments than these guys. By displaying their surface-level (mis)understanding of issues such as textual criticism, they showed they had done almost no reading on the issue. Furthermore, they were grossly ignorant of the presuppositional apologetic. I suppose I can't fault them too much for this since this position is not very popular. At any rate, I believe much better representatives could have and should have been found. Debates are hardly useful when they aren't focused. Perhaps atheistic ethics has no other concern than to disprove Christianity, even if the arguments are bad?
On the Christian side, I believe they did an overall excellent job. While Sye focused his attention on the presuppositional issues, Dustin dealt with some of the specific arguments leveled at them. However, I really felt that they should have spent more time dealing with their arguments. And as James White aptly demonstrates in his debates with unbelievers (whether atheists or liberals), you can be a presuppositionalist and still deal with the specific objections. For instance, if a skeptic argues, "How can you trust the Bible when all we have are copies of copies of copies of copies?" the presuppositionalist can remain consistent and still respond to the specific claim. Instead, presuppositionalists may respond with, "How can you talk about trusting the Bible when you have no rational basis for trusting your rationality?" I do not think this is always necessary. In fact, I believe it can be counterproductive at times. Again, overall these men did a great job and will serve as another testimony to this God-glorifying apologetic.