Yes, if you look at survival as one instance, it does become difficult to say anything about the likelihood based on the outcome. But I think it's too easy to

Yes, if you look at survival as one instance, it does become difficult to say anything about the likelihood based on the outcome. But I think it's too easy to dismiss this as survivorship bias. There are also other selection biases, which might explain the higher chances of survival of a species if an alive species is selected. There's also the multiverse theory, or more locally, something we could call "multi-environment". It does make sense that if we were here at all, we would most likely be in an environment where we were most likely to survive. Imagine 20 planets, or 20 timelines, where some make our survival nearly impossible, some - very difficult, and some - relatively easy and likely. We'd probably find ourselves alive on a planet or in a timeline where it was relatively easy and likely. I just read a bit more on this and it looks like the debate for whether human survival implies the low risk of extinction in the past is ongoing with good arguments on each sides. So I think I'll leave it up to more academic people than me to debate this, but thanks for your thoughts.