Talk:Abiogenesis/FAQ

Some users have noted that many of these questions should be included in the text of Abiogenesis. The reason for their exclusion is discussed below.

The main points of this FAQ (Talk:Abiogenesis) can be summarized as: More detail is given on each of these points, and other common questions and objections, below.
 * The occurrence of abiogenesis is uncontroversial among scientists, and there is ongoing research and competing hypotheses for how abiogenesis could have occurred.
 * Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy requires that minority views not be given undue emphasis.
 * It is against Wikipedia policy for views without scientific support, such as all known objections to abiogenesis, to be included in a science article like Abiogenesis.

To view the response to a question, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

For further information, see the numerous past discussions on these topics in the archives of Talk:Abiogenesis:

'''The article is not neutral. It doesn't mention that abiogenesis is controversial.'''
 * Definition (2002)
 * Definition (2013)
 * The article's first sentence is perhaps incorrect
 * Lead sentence does not meet the standards of Wikipedia core content policies

The article should mention alternative views prominently, such as in a criticism section.
 * Talk:Abiogenesis/Archive 1

Abiogenesis is just a theory, not a fact.
 * Statement on current state of theory - misleading
 * Abiogenesis is a scientific theory

There is scientific evidence against abiogenesis.
 * Talk:Abiogenesis/Archive 1