The odd thing about Krauss's talk is that there are a lot of perfectly respectable cosmologists who would not agree with a single thing he said, using the same sets of evidence.

When you get right down to it, his whole theory is based on:

1) Assuming that the red shift of distant galaxies is due to Doppler effect. (There are other phenomena such as Minkowski spacetime that explain it just as well.)

2) In order to support his non-collapsing (flat) universe he has to postulate Dark Energy and Dark Matter, for which there is no direct experimental evidence at all. And he has positioned himself so that failure of the LHC to produce any will not embarrass him. Locked and loaded.

He talks glibly about all of this as though it were settled science, not open to other interpretations, nor to be questioned (at least he did not show any disclaimers in this talk) ins spite of the sparseness or even non-existence of observational evidence to back him up.

We have a word for that: RELIGION.

And I have no doubt that Richard Dawkins would defend him to the death out of friendship.