ABSTRACT
H ow does one present any new idea which is in principle impossible to proof?Hypotheses are self-limiting and an old paradigm o f evolution will fall victim to its errors in logic. In biology in particular (because it is so close to our skin), old paradigms tend to exchange fundamental guidelines o f science for political correctness and technological expedience. Not for scientific restrictions, but for political reasons it would be difficult to find an unbiased jury for the proposal that humans might be o f various origins and, in part because o f methodological conve nience, the computer-oriented molecular biologists would (and do) enthusiastically ignore the evidence that protein structures may not bear a parametric relationship to genealogy. Science, culture, and vested interests tend to fuse as paradigms age and, off and on, the science must be extracted from this matrix and held to the light to see whether it holds up on its own. To that extent one must have clear ideas about what can be known, what constitutes evidence, what are truly dependent variables, as op posed to wishful thinking induced by emotional needs. Ah, but mathematical models will help, unemotional mathematics will brush out the rubbish o f prejudices and hu man sentimentality, or will it?
