Well, we've got some pretty good hypothesis about the mechanisms that spawn life, and we can extrapolate from there a little - though I do understand your point

Well, we've got some pretty good hypothesis about the mechanisms that spawn life, and we can extrapolate from there a little - though I do understand your point that we are burdened with an embarrassingly small sample size. For instance, the alkaline thermal vent origin hypothesis stands up to scrutiny - it may well end up being wrong, but the other contenders are not so robust. We know carbon is probably key, because of its properties, notably abundance and ability to oxidise (as Nick Lane, I think it was, quipped something like 'try growing a body with sand' (ie. silicon based lifeform)). I think the surprise here is the assumptions made around multi-cellular / mitochondria / krebbs (ATP) were so consistently observed, that an exception really stands out. Your tone suggests we shouldn't speculate about what requirements life has - but I don't think the intent is as full of malice as you appear to believe. I take it more as a curiosity meets a (prinerdial) need to catalogue everything, and then getting frustrated when things aren't so easily pidgeon-holed.