I found the following debate on YouTube uploaded in January 2012.

I only managed to watch the first 35 or so minutes of this debate. It seemed to be devolving rapidly. You may be able to watch more and actually get something from it. I couldn’t.

February 15, 2014

After thinking about this for a while, I realized the difference between the two presentations. One side seemed to present evidence that the presenter must have known was not the whole story. If you have a good case to make, do you need to deceive your audience?