The proponent for Islam made a precise and lucid presentation.

The debate and interaction gets better in the second half of the event.

In the first half of the debate, it seems that Prof. Krauss is only  irreverent and did not offer rational arguments to make a convincing case for  atheism. He chose to start with the silly claim that Islam is one of a thousand  religions and all are equally false. Whereas, Islam suggests that all religions  have been part of a continuum, until we reach its climax, in Islam.

His emphasis in the first part of his opening speech is about common sense.  But, his common sense seems to different from the common sense of theists and  appeal to common sense is not a valid argument. He then commits the absurdity of  denying deductive arguments, as a species and as there are only two types of  arguments deductive and inductive and the former are by far the better, it seems  to me that he is proposing chaos or irrationality.

He just seems to be bragging about his knowledge of mathematics and  physics rather than talk about the arguments put forward. A simple refutation  would be that not all of us are mathematicians or physicists, but there are  enough mathematicians and physicists, who are theists.

At many times, in this debate, I am reminded of a verse of the third chapter  of the Holy Quran:

He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book; in it there are verses that are  decisive in meaning — they are the basis of the Book — and there are others that  are susceptible of different interpretations. But those in whose hearts is  perversity pursue such thereof as are susceptible of different interpretations,  seeking discord and seeking wrong interpretation of it. And  none knows its right interpretation except Allah and those  who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is  from our Lord.’ — And none heed except those gifted with understanding. (Al  Quran 3:8)

I invite everyone to comment here about the core of the discussion, mainly  about the two arguments that the Muslim debater put forward. Their validity or  lack thereof. Discussion about Sharia Law, homosexuality and other red herrings  offered in this debate can be discussed another day, in a different post.

Finally, the subjects under discussion are too profound and the human  experience in different religious and scientific traditions too extensive, to be  covered in one debate.  Therefore, for an ongoing dialogue between the  Muslims, the Christians and the atheists, we have made this website, Islam for the West.  I believe that an ongoing  debate between the Christians and the agnostics or the atheists leads to  Islam.