If the Universe were arranged any other way, nobody would exist to discuss it. Look up "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle".
For me personally, Anthropic principles fail to explain why our universe is in one such fine-tuned state, when “all things being equal”, it was much more likely to develop into chaos.
The multiverse hypothesis is a contrived attempt to reconcile our elegant reality with blind chance, at odds with our universal observation that reality follows one path or another, but not all paths.
I think a more obvious solution to the enigma is that all things are NOT EQUAL, and that the path that results in life was preferred from the beginning.
Anthropic principles attempt to mask this blatantly teleological principle with the language of probability, illogically “proving” the a priori necessity of the cause from the a posteriori necessity of the effect.
When this faulty logic is removed, we are once again left with pure teleology: the universe was made for man.
No, you miss the point. First and foremost, we are here, I had to be at work by 8:30, so, we do exist. Acknowledging that we exist, you start to focus in on the window of parameters that must exist for us to be. As the article says, for that to happen by chance, would be like to hit a 1mm bullseye from across the universe (it does not say whether the thrower was actually targeting the bullseye or not). So, because we are here, and because all of the parameters have to be so finely tuned that it eliminates “tuning by chance”, the only alternative is that the “fine tuning” was designed.
That is the argument of the Bible. That man is engaged in a conversation with the Creator.
I never could understand the need to separate the two.