[SunkenCiv]

Well I do know that most stars are unstable red dwarfs. Also that most are binary or multiple star systems. I also know that most exoplanets are not located in a habitable zone. That’s common knowledge.

It has been *estimated* that up to 85% of stars are binary or multiple, relationships apparently first suggested a couple hundred years ago by Herschel. But using your own professed standard, the sheer number of binary or multiple star systems isn't evidence of anything.

Most exoplanets found thus far have been in orbit around red dwarf stars -- because they are much easier to detect. So, again, the sheer number of exoplanets around red dwarf stars isn't evidence of anything.

[snip] In October 2016, deep-field images from the Hubble Space Telescope suggested that there are about 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe, or about 10 times more galaxies than previously suggested... about 100 million stars in the average galaxy. [/snip] (Space.com)

[Telepathic Intruder]

"about 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe"
"about 100 million stars in the average galaxy"

I think that last figure should be about 100 billion, not 100 million. That's about 2x10^23 stars, which is consistent with what I've heard. A very high number, admittedly. I doubt the likelihood for life on any given planet is greater than those odds, but one can never know without some statistical basis to go by. A single planet with life doesn't provide it. If we could find just one more...