Comment: More like

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: If you are contending that we (see in situ)

More like

If you are contending that we can't estimate the probability of life permitting conditions against other possible conditions that aren't life permitting,

I'm contending that we don't even know whether probability is applicable to the question at all. Maybe it does make sense to ask "what are the odds" that our universe is the way it is, but we don't know enough about universe formation or creation (or the lack thereof if this is the only universe that is or was or ever will be) to answer the question. But universe formation/creation/whatever might not even be sufficiently like those mundane things for which causality and probability do apply, for our understanding of probability to be applicable.

We have to just remain silent on probability, in that case, and deal in other forms of non probabilistic arguments for deciding between the range of possible answers laid out in my previous comment.

I wouldn't know where to begin. Lead the way!

Your references for different physical theories of the multiverse, while perhaps interesting reading, lack true value to the non expert, since it would just be a lay persons opinion, when there is no consensus theory to appeal to.

It was only to suggest that the notion of multiverses doesn't (only) emerge from attempts at metaphysical explanation as you had said.