I think William Lane won that debate. Not that I think he is right and not that I believe in any god but Sam talked a lot about why he think god does not exist even if that was not what the debate was about. William was good at making clear arguments and following logical steps and trying to answer to Sam. I disagree with William basic arguments and I think he is missing some insights on the subject but he was way better then Sam. As an aside note, I think that there is no absolute moral objectivity in the world. There only is a moral that is relative to the human condition. So William is right, god is a solution to the "absolute objective" moral of the world but only because starting with something that is false (god) you can come up with something else that is false (an absolute moral ground blablabla...).