This debate ( audio | 1h20m ) took place last week! It was between Chris Hallq and Calum Miller and was supposed to be on probability and the resurrection, though they didn't really go into the details that the title of the episode implies, nor than what the host apparently wanted to get into.
Hallq's posts on the show.
Facebook discussion of the show.
I won't lie, I was pretty disappointed with the show. From reading the APF reviews of the past shows of Unbelievable and a few of my own experiences with other eps, it seems like the show has misses that significantly outweigh the hits. This is a bummer considering the show does get great guests and has such interesting topics!
But on to the debate. Or lack of it. It seemed like there was the hope this would become a more technical debate in that it would talk more about probability. But Bayes Theorem was only brought up once and it actually wasn't even defined or explained, at least not directly. Calum also seemed like the most liberal Xian and though he didn't do terrible or anything, he just wasn't amazing, either. One weird thing is that Calum doesn't like the KCA, the argument WL Craig is famous for popularizing.
Poor Hallq, he's had this issue before: his speech is plagued with ums and uhs. People have told him about this and I feel bad stacking criticism on him but it kind of became too distracting. Also, I think it was contagious, the host started doing it more it seemed. Hallq brought up some good points about Mormonism but they just didn't seem too relevant to the topic, or at least I bet that's how Xians will see it considering how critical they are of Mormonism (unless of course the Republican nom is Mormon, then they seem to be more open towards the religion :P). I was also a little annoyed that even though he was asked to debate probability with a student of Richard Swinburne - the guy who came up with the stat that there is a 97% chance that the resurrection was true - he said he had only read Swinburne's book a while ago.
Technical: Good AQ - it's radio.
I was surprised to find out that Hallq and I are the same age and Calum sounded pretty young too. One of the perks of the show is that they do seem more willing to get more amateurs on and this has some pros and cons. A pro is that people like Hallq and Ed Turner get to go up against apologists who should pretty much be considered professionals in their field...though in this case Calum doesn't seem to be one nor is he claiming to be one.