The hardly any of the interview addresses religious apologetics, at the 20:05 mark he is asked about William Lane Craig’s interpretation of the meaning of CCC and Penrose explains how Craig misunderstands it.
The point isn’t that the CCC is probably true, therefore the Kalam is false. We don’t yet know if the CCC is completely accurate. There are competing models by other cosmologists that very well could be correct.
The point is that apologists are so very quick to assert that the entire material universe must have had a beginning in order to try and drill out a god shaped hole to stick Yahweh in. The problem for apologists is that there’s no evidence that all of material reality must have had a beginning. What we have is simply an unknown in our current understanding, with numerous competing theoretical models that could explain the data we have.
Right now the best apologists can do is try to read their preferred metaphysical positions into the Big Bang and make arguments from those assumptions, but it’s nothing more than that.