Does this sound like a dumb question to you? Lol! The answer seems obvious, right? Okay, now think about it for a moment. Doesn’t this question give a different perspective on the significance of the observer?
Scientists are going to say, yes, the universe would still exist even if human beings did not. Philosophers are going to immediately recognize the flaw in that assertion. For one thing, human beings created the definition of the universe so by our definition it could not exist. Secondly, there would be no one here to verify its existence. Which leads to the third point and that is without an observer (consciousness) the existence of matter is irrelevant.
Present day science is firm on the assertion that without a brain the mind (consciousness) can not exist and that self-awareness is the result of the evolution (methodical or random rearrangement) of matter. Spiritualists, on the other hand, believe that matter and what we call the physical world is the result of the evolution of consciousness.
Science says that matter and energy can not be created or destroyed. Logically, if matter and energy was not created then it either always existed or doesn’t exist. Those of us who are self-aware observe that it does exist; hence, on an individual level, matter (and therefore the universe) exists as a result of consciousness. Please refute this logic if you can.
Science is based on observation and verification but seems to discount the most important component in that process, the observer.
I welcome criticism (good or bad) because it will help me refine my point so I invite all you scientists and philosophers out there to star my question and pounce as hard as you like. 
Put on your armor, mount your steed and let the intellectual jousting begin!
Source:
http://art-bell.info/your-questions-about-mysterious-universe-67/