Chuck should publish his thesis for peer review...oh, that's right, he's an evangelist spruiking faith, not an astrophysist.
A community service provided for the sake of balance.
I've not seen the video. I only want to point out making "peer review" the arbiter of truth is to employ a logical fallacy---an appeal to authority. A scientific proposition is either true or not based on its predicate facts, premises and conclusions, not because it has been approved by someone or some group of thinkers. That's very sloppy thinking.
It's not an appeal to authority to have someone knowledgeable in the field to review your work in order to pick up any flaws or mistakes.
That is what makes science the most successful method of discovery in the history of humankind.
And the absence and discouragement of questioning is what makes religion and faith the worst, dogma, contradictions, resentment of questioning, etc.
