Specifically: "In cosmology, fine tuning refers to the precise balance of cosmological constants that allow the observable universe to exist as it does. These constants include the speed of light, the rate of expansion of the universe, the force of gravity, the nuclear strong force, the electromagnetic force, and many other parameters of the observable universe."

Do you have reason to think any of these constants could be any other way than they are now? What if the constants were different and a different type of universe formed?

The fine-tuning does not really argue that the universe is made for humans as much as it is made for matter to form.

But it's still speaking in the position within this universe, and since we only have this one universe we don't actually know what things would be like if they were different.

If any physical constants were different the universe would probably be a big cloud of gas, rather than solid matter.

How do you know? Even then, there would still be something there and life may have been able to form within it. It's still looking at it with an egocentric point of view.

Lastly, what is your evidence that life is a product of the universe?

You'll have to define what you mean by universe in this instance.

1) We have life.

2) We have the universe.

3) The universe had to have some sort of matter in order to produce life at all.

4) Life arose from the matter that was present in the universe.

Do you have evidence showing abiogenesis?

I don't have to. I'm not asserting any answers to such problems. I'm perfectly fine say I don't know and saying that we don't currently have a good explanation for abiogenesis. There are some solid experiment to show that a god isn't required, but that's about all we've got so far.