Any life form that has reached the cognitive capability to reason about itself will be amazed by the sheer "coincidence" of their habitat. "wow, isn't it amazing that our planet's atmosphere is composed of the very ammonia we need to survive in?"
No invisible hand required.
Also evolution is "intelligently selective". Surviving and reproducing is a pretty intelligent mechanism. It will find local maxima pretty effectively.
Isn't this a non sequitur? Whether any life form would wonder about its existence (probable or otherwise) has no bearing whatever on whether it evolved or was designed or specially created.
I'm sure there is a Douglas Adams passage that illustrates this but I can't remember it.
Now the question of exactly how improbable is more relevant, and this is why people care about making primordial soups more easily: everyone agrees that abiogenesis is improbable.
Since chemistry is not selective (or at least no one has demonstrated a parallel mechanism for natural selection that applies to chemistry), our tools are to somehow find ways to change random chance to dependent probabilities and to find enough time for the chemistry to happen. While we have a fairly good grasp of the time limits, it's the probability that is harder to quantify.
Why not?