I understand the concept, but I don't think it applies to life specifically. Even the simplest cell is more complex than any other naturally occurring formation we have ever seen in the universe.
Furthermore, unlike waterfalls, we actually have no idea how life appeared and, despite trying for many years, have been entirely unable to produce life from non-living things, and we have never observed this process occurring naturally either.
Furthermore, every living thing we've ever looked at has been a relative of other living things - as far as we've been able to determine, all of the life on Earth has a single origin, a single original RNA/DNA code which must have been present in a single population of organisms, at a single location. This is a strong suggestion that the conditions that allowed life to appear on Earth may have been extraordinarily specific - otherwise, we would expect many unrelated beings sharing the planet (or at least it means that a particular for of life was overwhelmingly more adaptive and entirely wiped out all of the others).
Even worse, there is another phenomenon for which we only have evidence of one instance happening in the history of the Earth: all eukaryotic life has a single common ancestor, and there are no complex multicellular organisms which are not eukaryotes.
So, not only did life arise only once on the one planet we know it can thrive in, but complex life only arose once from simpler life.
So, while we can't say that it's plausible life will never again arise in the universe, we can say that for any particular moment of time, it is plausible that no new life is being formed anywhere else in the universe.