No, probability is not "meaningless for singular events". We can meaningfully discuss, in Bayesian terms, the probability of drawing a red ball from a jar, even if that jar will be destroyed after the single draw. The probabilities are assessments about our state of knowledge.

Therefore no, we cannot dismiss all anthropic reasoning for the reasons you suggested.

If you got "probability is meaningless for singular events" from what you learned here, either you are confused, or I am. (Possibly both.)

Can we dismiss all anthropic reasoning by saying that probability is meaningless for singular events?

No, because it isn't isn't meaningless.

That is, the only way to obtain probability is from statistics

No, you can get it from mathematics. Even basic arithmetic. Infinite series of events, on the other hand, those are hard to come by.

, and I cannot run repeated experiments of when, where, and as what I exist.

I dismiss many examples of (bad) anthropic reasoning because they assume that that the probability of their subjective experience is what you get if you draw a random head out of a jar of all things that meet some criteria of self awareness.

Do you mean by subjective probability the fact(?) that probability is about the map and not the territory?

Kind of. Read Probability is subjectively objective

If yes, what! Contrary?? I learned about it here!

The frequentist dogma was the 'contrary' part, not the 'maps/territory' stuff. Probability doesn't come from statistics and definitely applies to single events.