Fine tuning: a discussion for the rest of us mortals

Lo all this may be somewhat off topic, but AP bugs the shit out of me.
Doesn't the idea that a life permitting universe is extremely unlikely depend entirely on their being more than one?
Also doesn't it depend on our ability to check how many contain life?
As it stands, with only one universe, aren't the odds 1-0 in favour?
Looked at from an internal perspective, the odds of life bearing planets existing in this universe other than Earth, are very much in favour of lots more.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=447
An estimated 100million in our galaxy alone
So basicly, with no other universe to check we'd have to say that, the odds are totally in favour of life, as long as the universe has the physics it has (it does) and contains the elements it does (it does).
So unless you can say that these things are also incredibly fine tuned (I don't see how you could) the AP is pointless (for this use).
And it seems to say fine tuning's not real anyway.

Rgb says Sure, sorry bout that.Rgb continues I'm pretty sure this dealt with the capailty for life not the fact itself. If we're only dealing in planets which have life then at one point in history, we'd have to say that no life was possible.
Mars could possibly have supported life in the past, and possibly could again. That's enough to show that Earth isn't unique.Cavedigger says Then doesn't the "if" have to be answered before we can move on?..and continues Why? The vast majority of the values needed are common to the entire galaxy. If all that's neccesary after this is to be within a certain range of proximty to a sun, and water, how likely is it that there's only one planet with these two values?
Mars seems to have, or have had, both.If the question is how many life bearing planets at any one specific time, then sure, it's posssible there's only one, but across all time?The BBC did a Horizon special about this recently, with computer simulations varying the strength and existence of physical laws, and almost none of the universes failed, most were just different.
I can't find a link atm, but will continue lookingSidelined says And I agree.

double postEdited by Shh, : double post

Lo again
Rgb,
File Not Found (404) | American Association for the Advancement of Science
For current searches for life bearing worlds, a shortlist of 10 solar systems, from a list of And further, microbial life, at the very least is believed to be likely to be common.
Evolution doesn't procede at a set pace and so highly developed life is likely to be scarcer, but this doesn't mean it's unlikely to exist.
Earth – Facts and Information about the Planet EarthYou can say that all planets are unique and you're correct, that doesn't mean only one can possibly have the neccesary conditions. And no I probably can't name the neccesary conditions in great detail, but once planets with water and an energy source (say a sun) exist, what other conditions would you suggest need to be filled?Cavedigger, Hi
you said Does this sound like fine tuning to you? it seems highly inefficient to me for something which is designed to produce intelligent life.
Do you think it will take us this long to create true A.I.?
I don't. Me too.

Sorry I kinda thought that, after the last post, it's the idea of intent that bugs me, not the idea that there's reasons things are as they are