Would you be an atheist if science and reason wasn't supportive of atheism?

[Kirbmarc]

In fact, this has become something of a mainstay in Cosmology (study of the universe), being called "the anthropic principle". Anthro = human.

The Anthropic principle is flawed because it assumes that iwas necessary for intelligent life to emerge. This isn't true. Life emerged and adapted to the universe, not vice-versa.

The universe isn't fine-tuned to life, life has been fine-tuned to the universe through a long process of emergence of structures and survival of the strctures who managed to replicate themselves. The Anthropic principle is the equivalent of sentient puddle who imagines that the form hole in which it lies is "fine-tuned" to her form, when it's the form of the puddle who is a consequence of the form of the hole.