First, I would want to see the math behind that. That seems to be a ridiculous claim.
Second, there are some constants in the universe (G for example) that, while not as fine tuned as you claim, are in the right ball park for things to happen (For G for stars and planets to form) However, it has been postulated, by the people who study these things, that there could well be good reasons why these constants are at the values they are and in actuality could not be that different.
Thirdly, if you look at M-theory is suggests that billions of universes are being created. If each has different values for the constants then eventually one will have the right values, and in that universe life will happen and in that universe life will gain intelligence and in that universe that intelligence will wonder at the odds of those constants coming up in the right numbers.
Fourthly, those constants are for the universe and life as we know it to happen. If the constants were different then the universe could just look differently and life could still occur, just based on the scientific laws of that universe. It would still be life.
Think about this:
If I set up a glass in the middle of a football field, and throw a ping-pong ball onto the field the odds of getting the ball into the glass are astronomic.
However, if I cover the field in glasses and throw the ball it will end up in a glass. The odds that it would have ended up in that one glass is still as astronomic as it was before, but the odds that it would end up in a glass is 1:1