Scientists usually dislike the Anthropic Principal because, in their opinion, it does not actually explain anything.

I tend to agree. But that does not mean that it is of no use, because what it does very well is to remind us what actually needs explanation and what does not.

The fact that life developed right here on earth seems so specific and so unlikely to have happened just by chance.

But it is not the fact that life developed here on earth that needs explanation - it's the fact the life developed at all.

The Anthropic Principal just shows, that if life developed anywhere, this would be the place where conscious beings might evolve that can ask such questions.

So, if we can answer the question why (meaning how) life developed at all, the Anthropic Principal allows us to settle on pure chance regarding the detail why it did that right in our front yard.