By not taking Randall too seriously, I mean it's good to assume that he's making spiritual claims rather than scientific ones. A lot of his ideas don't make sense as science, and he definitely isn't interested in the scientific process. But if you think of his ideas as an offshoot of the whole "sacred geometry" thing, they make perfect sense.

Sometimes he cites peer reviewed science, even pretty mainstream peer reviewed science like the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis, but don't be tricked by that. The Young Earth people figured that strategy out years ago, and he's borrowing it from them. The point is that scientists look at the evidence to see if claims are true, while Randall looks for the evidence that his claims are true. It's an inversion of scientific falsifiability.