There really are a lot of these "proofs" that are given as questions. Dare I reiterate yet again that a question is a proof of nothing except your own ignorance, dear theist? And it's certainly not a proof of your now unstated assertion. And I'm going to keep repeating this point as often as is necessary. (At least ten items on the list are basically just questions like this, so I apologize to my readers if this gets boring!)
But now, to the question itself...
What do you think would happen to the human race if it were not true that we need to eat and drink and food and drink which is available to us to eat and drink?
The answer to that question is extremely obvious: We would be dead.
This doesn't take a lot of thinking about to realize. If this weren't the case, we would all die. Evolution predicts this just fine. If what we need to survive were not around, we would be dead. I can't repeat this too much because it just doesn't seem to be getting through via the usual ways.
Sadly, I fear it's hopeless, since "proofs" #16-20 are all variations of this theme.
(For the curious, this an argument from the Anthropic Principle, essentially.)
It might also be observed, however, that our hunger and thirst haven't been catered too all that well since we have children dying of starvation in Africa. And Americans get diabetes because there is too much sugar and processed carbohydrates in our diet. (How are we being catered to if it's making us sick?) This who/what supposedly responsible for this isn't doing a very god-like job.