Early Mercury would have been a better incubator planet than Earth.
Has anyone ever thought the same?
From the web:
"Notice Mercury has oxygen , water and methane, even now, so early on it could have had them in abundance."
"Any ancient life on Mercury would have faced many extinction events. Here on Earth many past life forms have been destroyed by asteroid impacts. The dinosaurs are a classic example. Images of Mercuryís surface returned by the Mariner 10 and MESSENGER spacecraft have shown that the surface has suffered many large impacts. In fact, it was heavily bombarded during the Late Heavy Bombardment that occurred about 3.9 billion years ago. Any one of those impacts could have destroyed any life on the planet. Many scientists believe that a great deal of the planetís surface was stripped away by one impact. If the impact removed a large portion of the surface, surely it would have taken any life that existed at the time with it."
So I propose a transfer of of living cells/spores could have happened 3.9 billion years ago. Doesn't that time coincide fairly well with life first being noticed on Earth?