Lists of “unsolved mysteries” in genetics, human origins and consciousness often mix (i) genuine mechanistic unknowns, (ii) limitations of measurement and reference quality, and (iii) category errors in which philosophical questions are treated as if they were missing molecular details. This review reframes each frequently cited “mystery” as an explicit evidence-gap and evaluates it against current data and explicit null models. A conservative information-theoretic framing is used throughout: genomes, cells, brains and societies are treated as physical systems that store, transform and transmit information under thermodynamic and evolutionary constraints. This framing helps distinguish what is open in practice (because measurement is hard) from what is constrained in principle (because population genetics, chemistry and neural dynamics limit the plausible solution space). We synthesize evidence on: (1) noncoding DNA and the “junk DNA” debate, separating biochemical activity from selected function; (2) protein folding in vivo, emphasizing energy landscapes, cotranslational folding, chaperones and quality control, and clarifying what machine-learning structure prediction does—and does not—explain; (3) Y-chromosome evolution and why complete telomere-to-telomere assemblies shift arguments about degeneration and disappearance into quantitative population genetics; (4) epigenetic inheritance, robust within individuals but constrained across mammalian generations by germline reprogramming; and (5) “dark genome” claims as annotation and callability problems increasingly addressed by long-read assemblies, proteogenomics and ribosome profiling. For human origins, we revisit chromosome-scale rearrangements (including the chromosome 2 fusion), ancient DNA evidence for branching histories and admixture, and misconceptions about “mitochondrial Eve” and the “missing link.” For abiogenesis, we articulate an experimentally anchored chain from plausible prebiotic synthesis to nonenzymatic copying and protocell growth/division, while acknowledging unresolved bottlenecks (error thresholds, sustained cycles, and metabolism–genetics coupling). Finally, we evaluate quantum-level claims about consciousness with a stringent burden-of-proof: quantum biology exists in specific systems, but strong proposals in neuroscience must specify physical carriers, coupling mechanisms, coherence/error-correction arguments, computational advantages, and discriminating perturbation tests. We conclude with a falsifiability battery and an evidence hierarchy designed to separate productive hypotheses from untestable narratives.