You people are in severe denial....! 
It is however said to be useful psychologically, to absorb information we are not comfortable with....
I watched the video.
The first part is devoted to the idea that existence and consciousness are somehow fundamental and inseparable. Unfortunately Mr Nelson(who made the video) makes no attempt to define consciousness or even discuss its relative (un)importance compared with the unconscious/subconscious. Ditto with the idea of existence, no attempt is made to define what existence actually entails. The video somewhat blithely goes on to discuss ideas of how the two are interlinked. It poses the philosophical question of what came before the big bang(as others on this board have alluded to), but makes no real attempt to answer that question at all. Yes, it does pay lip service to the idea expressed by Stephen Hawkins that if one starts with a no boundary universe the idea of what came before makes no sense because of the lack of a time element, but it simply dismisses that by saying 'and yet for many this answer fails to satisfy' without expanding on this statement at all.
He asks questions such as why our universe should be constrained by the laws of quantum mechanics and does at least realise that any proposed answer to such a question leads to the problem of infinite regress. He also realises that the same reasoning applies to consciousness. However he makes no attempt to tackle this problem at all, simply going on to quote from selected scientists, philosophers, etc. to emphasise his main point, which is the proposed importance of consciousness to existence. One point he makes was his dismissal of 'the material understanding of science' as being unable to deal with 'how and why consciousness exists'. Actually, science has arguably made great progress in this direction and unsurprisingly he is unable to put anything of substance in place of this. Instead he seems to rely on ideas and conjectures selected from various scientists and philosophers arguing for the fundamental importance of consciousness to reality, with particular emphasis on the circularity idea of consciousness being some sort of feedback phenomenon, views which are certainly interesting but lacking totally in precision and open to considerable debate.
He does make the point that perhaps there is no such thing as 'nothing' and therefore we should seek a self existing something as a base which obviates the need for something coming from nothing. Whilst I have considerable sympathy for the idea, he then suggests that the laws of quantum mechanics could not be such a base as they need further explanation, and that explanation, he suggests, is the state of consciousness. Of course, as Blue has said, it leads to exactly the same problem, because the idea of consciousness surely needs further explanation also.
The basis of his argument about the relationship between consciousness and quantum mechanics lies in the idea of the observer effect, that is that a quantum wave form seems only to collapse when observed, or more accurately, measured. Hence the idea is that consciousness affects the quantum basis of reality. The problem with this, of course, is that the observer does not have to be conscious at all, but can be simply a piece of apparatus. Also observers can be observed, leading to the paradox of Wigner's Friend. And then there is the subject of decoherence which mainstream science generally accepts as the natural way in which quantum effects swiftly disappear as classical physics takes over. Neither of these require a state of consciousness to be present, and neither is referred to by Mr Nelson in his video. As the physicist, John Bell inquired:
Was the wave function waiting to jump for thousands of millions of years until a single-celled living creature appeared? Or did it have to wait a little longer for some highly qualified measurer—with a PhD?
To sum up, I can understand why the video can be appealing to some. It has lovely graphics and, as long as one isn't too critical, has an appealing message which resonates well with us as human beings where consciousness is held in such high regard. However, personally I found it all rather shallow and vague.
