Evidentialist or Presup?

I was listening to the Narrow Mind, and Gene Cook is talking about apologetics..

I don't remember exactly what they said which caused me to think about this, but I started thinking about whether I was a presuppositional apologtist or an evidentialist. You know: William Lane Craig is what I would call the pre-eminent evidentialist going around. If you listen to the Bible Answer Man, Hank is really a knock off of Dr. Craig -- and the odd thing is that they are both somewhat opposed to strictly-reformed (Kim Riddlebarger notwithstanding) doctrines of soteriology and God.

So can you be a "Calvinist" and be an evidentialist? Or do the premises of evidentialism lead you to reject Calvinism for some reason? Or does it turn out -- since we don't mind propping up controversy here, if only for the sake of discussion -- that there is a latent humanism and rationalism and modernism in evidentialism which obstructs the full force ofthe Gospel?

See : I started writing this post to consider whether I was actually both -- that is, both evidentialist and presuppositionalist. But the more I consider it, the less I care about that.

I'm eating my cereal as I type this, and I'm going to try to stop in around lunch to see if this has kicked up any dust.