Isn't That Another Example of the N Equals One Argument?

Life started fairly rapidly on Earth and that it didn't become complex very rapidly. Can we conclude from that that one, life is likely to start in other places because it happened rapidly on Earth or were we just unlucky? So the argument that we don't know how likely it is for non-alive chemicals to become alive has been a very good argument for the n equals one position. And things have changed a little bit in recent years for a couple of reasons. We never thought there would be billions upon billions of Earth-like planets in the galaxy. But it doesn't alter our fundamental objection that maybe life on Earth was a tremendous fluke and it's just not replicated anywhere else.