Gould compared the claim that the universe is fine-tuned for the benefit of our kind of life to saying that sausages were made long and narrow so that they could fit into modern hotdog buns, or saying that ships had been invented to house barnacles. These critics cite the vast physical, fossil, genetic, and other biological evidence consistent with life having been fine-tuned through natural selection to adapt to the physical and geophysical environment in which life exists. Life appears to have adapted to physics, and not vice versa.
If life-forms have changed over the billions of years of evolution and intelligent design, then this change had to have proceeded according to the laws of nature.
(Intelligent design does no violence to nature, either.)
But all life-forms, even the earliest ones, are “adapted to physics.” Our argument tries to say that if the universe were badly tuned, then there would be no life, even complex structures as such, at all. There would be no “physical, fossil, genetic, and other biological evidence” of natural selection, because there would be no natural selection in the first place.
The “physics” would be such that no living creatures would be able to adapt to it.
So, this is not a good way of arguing against the theistic implications of fine-tuning.