Many people would like us to use these coincidences as evidence of the work of God. The idea that the universe was designed to accommodate mankind appears in theologies and mythologies dating from thousands of years ago. In Western culture the Old Testament contains the idea of providential design, but the traditional Christian viewpoint was also greatly influenced by Aristotle, who believed "in an intelligent natural world that functions according to some deliberate design."
That is not the answer of modern science. As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.
Our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws. That multiverse idea is not a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning. It is a consequence predicted by many theories in modern cosmology. If it is true it reduces the strong anthropic principle to the weak one, putting the fine tunings of physical law on the same footing as the environmental factors, for it means that our cosmic habitat—now the entire observable universe—is just one of many.
Each universe has many possible histories and many possible states. Only a very few would allow creatures like us to exist. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.
Suffice to say, this is no more convincing than the shorter quote I somewhat flippantly (but only somewhat) took to task a few days ago. Anyhow, I don't have time to comment much at the moment, but hope to take this is up further soon. I'll just note that it's not obvious in the least how, in Hawking's view of things, men end up being "the lords of creation"—even "in a sense." How so? If Hawking is right about "creation" and the universe, man is, at best, an interesting but ultimately meaningless blip on the biological screen of cosmic history—and only "interesting" because he (either man in general or Hawking in particular) says so, which is very, very small solace indeed.