I made this comment first. Calling someone a fool is not an argument. Plantingsa argument is much stronger than the other one, I have not read anything that debunks it convincingly.

Plantinga argues that if God made man (this process could have used guided evolution) then he could have given him cognitive faculties so that he could know God. Therefore, if thesism is true, belief in God is rational. This is in contrast to Naturalism, where by if Naturalism and evolution are true belief in Naturalism is not rational.