I didn't know propose M theory, but rather a specific hypothesis of my own, which has (at least) more evidence than fine tuning provides for theism.If fine, tuning is enough to lend theism credibility, then, trivially, my hypothesis is credible as well.
I thought to myself, "theism is such a laughably bad hypothesis, it should be pretty easy to come up with one that is both very simple and much better.". So I thought about it for all of about ten minutes and came up with M.Is M a good hypothesis? Not particularly.But it's better than theism.
You don't need to include any options besides the three categories listed. You just have to acknowledge that what you're left with is a space of "chance" hypotheses that is huge.For instance, M' is a chance hypothesis:M': all possible physics are instantiated in some universe.P(LPU|M') = 1, which constitutes a substantial and direct objection to Craig's P2 on top of the objection in the OP.