[alexander_busek]

The "weak" Anthropic Principle is clearly true. However it has no explanatory power.

The Anthropic Principle knocks the legs out from under the notion that the conditions (incl. the Fine-Structure Constant) being "just right" for life / us humans is indicative of the existence of a benevolent Creator - since, if they WEREN'T "just right," we OF COURSE wouldn't be here to make the COUNTER-observation.

Regards,

[lasereye]

It does no such thing. As I said the anthropic principle has no explanatory power. By that I mean it doesn't explain why a universe came into existence where everything is perfectly arranged for human life, not to mention that seemingly the entire universe is held together by the fine-structure constant.

You are committing the "necessary but not sufficient" causal fallacy.

A causal fallacy you commit this fallacy when you assume that a necessary condition of an event is sufficient for the event to occur. A necessary condition is a condition that must be present for an event to occur. A sufficient condition is a condition or set of conditions that will produce the event. A necessary condition must be there, but it alone does not provide sufficient cause for the occurrence of the event. Only the sufficient grounds can do this. In other words, all of the necessary elements must be there.

A universe that supports life is a necessary condition in order for us to be observing it. There is no causal explanation in that statement. That is the additional necessary element: In other words, all of the necessary elements must be there.