After being in many debates I've come to realize that one's world view seems to be the paramount factor on if someone will change their position or not. Even when I was a Christian, my world view was that God's miracles were only miracles because we didn't know enough. I guess that's why my transition to Atheism was inevitable but for others it's damn near impossible regardless of the facts. When addressing an alternate position, wouldn't it be more prudent to address the world view of the person first to see if they will process new information first? I don't know how one slowly changes another person's world view if their position won't allow it to begin with.

This is true - we live in different universes; for instance, most theists or 'supernaturalists' live in a universe that is filled with supernatural entities and supernatural 'stuff', and so in a situation where they perhaps think that an atheist may have a good point in a debate - a 'game changing' point - actually conceding that point and accepting what he/she said would entail "entering" a universe where such things don't exist. That's a huge jump, that may seem trivial to the atheist.
I'm sure 'supernaturalists' could say the same about the inverse situation; but I'm an atheist now, so that's my starting point.