I said IF THE EARTH IS NOT SPECIAL, and you may substitute unique for that, the mathematical odds would seem to indicate thrlere may be other life. Latest estimates put the number of stars in the observable universe to be anywhere from 10 sextillion to 1 septillion. If other stars have planets we would consider habitable, (ie Earth is not unique, part of the original premise ) then the chances of finding exo life increases every time you find another earth. I'm not going to do any hand waving and pull numbers out of the air like Drake or Sagan always did. But I can say this: if the likelihood of life developing was equal to rolling a "six" on a six-sided die then the universe should be teeming with life. If, on the other hand, the likelihood of life devoloping is equal to a deck of cards being randomly shuffled and come up in one particular order, then you could say that it is unlikely for there to be other life in the universe. The real likelihood is somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. There is no equation to make because we would have to guess at the numbers. But it still remains that if A sometimes causes B, the more iterations you have of A the more likely you are to have outcome B. There is nothing difficult about that.
You are attacking a straw man here. I didn't say that I assumed anything. Again, I am saying is it better to assume life does not exist because of the lack of evidence, or ia it better to NOT assume life does NOT exist because we just don't have the information to assume ANYTHING. I don't know how many ways I can say this. I'm guessing we may have pretty close to the same opinion on this matter. Not assuming = assuming nothing.