Actually, one might ponder if the universe being stable isn't a strange thing in the first place. If there were infinite universes,* I'd suspect that the average one would be either lifeless or contain conditions suitable for life only briefly. Universes that contain intelligent self-aware beings might turn out to be rather unlikely. They might also turn out to be themselves on the edge of being either lifeless or about to become lifeless very soon.
It took 14.8 Ga for life to reach the stage it is presently in, so to observe what we observe the universe doesn't need stability for more than a few tens of billions of years. Exactly the big slurp time frame. It would then be somewhat surprising if we had significantly more before us. If this turns out to be true, it would be depressing – I felt rather dispirited reading the first post – but it should not have been unexpected.
Another consequence of this line of thought is that we might turn out to be alone in the universe. I mean, if I'm correct to assume that we should be on the edge of being lifeless, life will be anything but abundant. But hey, life has
to be like galactic federal elections - results on similar planets have to be highly correlated.
Please correct me, I want to be wrong.
* Actually, the probability that the universe is what it is has
to be the same whether there is one or there are an infinite number, but meh, otherwise the anthropic principle makes less sense to me.