Your premise is false. Scientists don't only look at life similar to earth. However, they put most of the focus on that. They do it for a few very good reasons, for one, they know earth like conditions can produce life, therefore if they find earth like conditions they will likely find life. Secondly, given that we have a good example of life here, we know what to look for. What do you think would be the characteristics of silicone based life for example? Because we dont either, hence, harder to look for

I think you are reading a very over hyping article. Read the research behind it. It's very interesting things, but they're arguing about minute details in the timeline of the big bang. Not really suggesting the big bang didn't happen.

It doesn't even postulate that the expansion started at that point. Only what we would describe as "time" started. It's entirely plausible that the universe is unbound in space, thus expanding for all eternity.

I think the part that is confusing you OP, is that there are many reasons why this is impossible First reason - Requires infinite energy- since there's mass beyond the event horizon, you have to pull it back against the pull of the black hole, hence infinitely hard by definition of event horizon

Inside black hole you cant send a signal - again, requires FTL travel and also black hole geometry is not like on earth. In fact, the points are discontinuous, so past the event horizon, everything points towards the center.

Yes. For example any form of life that is "denser" then us, will have the same complexity but smaller size. One could hypothesize life evolving under immense gravity being far far smaller then here.

While true, time still passes for the person inside the space ship, if we need to travel 80 light years, you will have to survive 80 years

Cryogenics / worm holes are still a possibility!