Roughly, it just supports my understanding of Objectivism that places man’s happiness (happiness defined as productive achievement) as a rational being as his highest moral value.
The question by theists is often then, “Why man?” or “Why life”. Rand (the fonder of Objectivist philosophy) handles the first question in "The Virtues of Selfishness”, describing his evolution from earlier life forms as a progression toward greatness through a variety of measures and dependent upon his unique abilities and needs. But AFAIK, the “why life” question isn’t addressed directly, leaving theists to claim that it’s arbitrary or borrowed from God and religion.
But I believe the pattern of universal development exemplifies (perhaps even dictates) the movement toward greater life, with man at its pinnacle, and supports any rational belief that promotion of life is at the foundation of any moral hierarchy defining what is “good”.
I disagree that man is in any way the "pinnacle" of life, and would argue that the evidence more closely supports a throwaway line from "The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy," to the effect that "human thought is so primitive, it's looked upon as an infectious disease in some of the better galaxies."