What I mean is:
1) I read your paragraph first, assuming it was a brief teaser of the main point of the video. I found myself asking immediately if the statement "molecules don't care about life" is really meaningful at all in this context. It begs the question of an intelligent design argument. How? Well, the only thing that can "care" about anything is intelligence, and if that's "the problem", then you assume before you start that life needs an intelligent designer. Word salad.
2) I watched the first part of the video where the speaker definitely the "minimum characteristics of life" as needing cells, and then immediately shuts down objection to the argument he knows is coming by claiming anyone that might question that is simply "redefining official terms". And right at the beginning he puts a hurdle in front of the other sides argument. What a horrible strawman. Again - word salad.
It was at this point that I just stopped and posted my previous statement.