Yeah, that presuppositionalism is refuted by the possibility of emergent properties in nature.

Nature is a very creative place. The question is whether an intelligent designer needs to be posited to explain that creativity. But once nature gets started, lots of higher orders emerge from relatively random accumulations of particles, including molecules, stars, planets, life, consciousness, intelligence, personhood, culture, and so on. Naturalists can indeed explain that emergence far better than theists can, going all the way back to the very early known universe. Theists explain nothing by positing supernatural miracles.

So no, neither Andersen's nor Plantinga's apologetics goes far.