If the universe was fine tuned for our life...

[Jackalope]

Of course not. However, if we grant one of your premises, that certain sub-realities require intellect to create, and you conclude from this that the reality containing said sub-realities requires intellect to exist, then you most certainly have committed a fallacy of composition. In fact, said observed sub-realities are not realities at all, but more properly described as models or simulations.

How you came up with "you think causality is fallacious?" from that is beyond me.

Premise A: Realities can contain sub realities.
Premise B: We observe sub realities coming into existence.
Premise C: We always observe the hand of intellect participating in the creation of a sub reality.
Premise D: We never observe sub realities coming into existence without an intellect.
Conclusion: Our observations suggest that sub realities require the hand of intellect to come into existence.

Where is this the composition fallacy in the above argument?

Thanks for laying it out clearly, I may have misunderstood where you're going with it. I'll withdraw that complaint until I see where you're going with it now.

Is there a composition fallacy in this next argument?

No, but your premise E and D are not in fact true - at least at the quantum level - unless you're able to demonstrate the cause of virtual particles coming into existence, or the cause of an individual atom's decay. AFAIK, those things to not have demonstrated causes (which is not quite the same as saying they are causeless, but it does negate your premises E and D below).

Premise E: We always observe effects having causes.
Premise D: We never observe effects not having causes.
Conclusion: Our observations suggest that effects always have causes.