It only takes a single first thought by an intelligence to observe the Universe. Everything occurring up to then (e.g. nucleii, carbon, brains) is highly unlike

It only takes a single first thought by an intelligence to observe the Universe. Everything occurring up to then (e.g. nucleii, carbon, brains) is highly unlikely and therefore many people suggest an Anthropic Principle to explain it. Once that single first thought by an intelligence has occurred, the Weak or Strong Anthropic Principle is no longer required to explain the existence of intelligence, and so its continuance has the same unlikeliness as other life forms, i.e. ultimate extinction. The fact humans became the opposite of extinct (e.g. fire, scrolls, nukes) suggests that if the Anthropic Principle applies to the emergence of intelligence, something even "stronger" such as the Final Anthropic Principle could apply to the continuance of intelligence. I'm not saying there's an underlying Anthropic Principle in the Universe. I'm answering the question to show that the Final Anthropic Principle is as scientific a proposal as anything else.