I wasn't implying you were dense, the anthropic argument is advanced by some people who are probably a lot more clever than the both of us put together. Nonetheless, I still have problems with it, as do many other equally clever people.

This argument, to oversimplify, is that the reason we see the universe as it is is because it has to be this way in order for us to have evolved to observe it that way, which, in my opinion, is just begging the question. If the universe had evolved differently, then we would have evolved differently also, or perhaps not evolved at all, in any form. In fact, that last sentence may be a grammatically correct statement that is still meaningless. For example, "Is the King of France bald?". that question does not have a yes or no answer since France has no king. It is a meaningless question.

The man in the stadium mistakes the minute probability of being spotted by the pigeon as evidence of his own uniqueness and importance. In fact, SOMEONE had to be hit by the bird, or perhaps no one at all. The event has no intrinsic significance, even though it undoubtedly happened. You win the lottery because you won the lottery. There is no reason why it happened.

If we could magically start the universe all over again, it might evolve very differently than it has, but...so what? That universe would be no more special than this one, just as if the pigeon had anointed some other spectator instead. The same logic can be employed with the "infinity of universes" hypothesis

I may be old fashioned, but I believe it is pointless to conjecture about
the possibility of events for which we have no possible means of verification. Questions about the universe must always be asked in such a way that they suggest a means to answer them, or they are simply philosophical speculation, not science.

As for intelligent design, there is a profound contradiction in the statement itself! If this magnificent complex universe could not have been created without the guidance of an intelligent designer, how could the designer himself (who is presumably even more complex and magnificent than his creation) have been created? Religious solutions do not answer any questions, they just postpone them.

I do not deny that that this wonderful phenomenon we call consciousness may have some role in the creation or evolution of the cosmos. What I'm saying is we have no way of saying what that role is, or if it even exists. Until we have a question that is capable of an answer, through experiment or observation, we're just articulating our ignorance.