I never said they created the multiverse to counter the fine tuning but rather it has become common for scientist to use a multiverse for this reason to counter the fine tuning. The figures of speech I hear or read the scientists saying or being ascribed to for the fine tuning outcome is one of astonishment or surprise. That to me is describing something that is a big deal.
I can appreciate the bigger context except some are taking the multiverse very seriously and make claims that it is now fact. A multiverse is supported because it is tied to existed theories. One of the consequences of inflation theory is a multiverse but this has led to people saying we have to abandon inflation as a multiverse invalidates it. Still many want to hold on to the idea. So it seems that despite a multiverse being something that cannot be verified people still want to use it.
Yet when people talk about fine tuning they say it cannot be verified and dismiss it. Both have indirect support and both can be tied to existing theories yet only a multiverse is accepted. The ironic thing is when it comes to the fine tuning argument a multiverse supports the idea of there being slightly different values for the physical parameters, but just not possible in our universe.
From what I understand some scientists are not just pondering about fine tuning but have accepted it and take it seriously. They just don't attribute God to it and believe that there is some other explanation such as the multiverse. But to deny that there are no scientists who actually accept the fine tuning is wrong IMO as the evidence shows otherwise.
The Fine Tuning of the Universe
the scientific establishment’s most prestigious journals, and its most famous physicists and cosmologists, have all gone on record as recognizing the objective truth of the fine-tuning.
The Fine Tuning of the Universe | Gerald Schroeder