The pattern of the eonic effect is an effective falsification of Darwin's theory of natural selection, even as it affirms, but extends, the meaning of evolution. The term 'falsification' is sui generis, as it were, but obviously echoes the usage and thinking of Popper, whose treatment can be just on the sidelines. Actually, falsification is for theories, and especially very exact theories, such as we find in physics. In the biological and cultural sciences it can be unfair to put generalizations in the same category. But if one proposes a 'law of history', 'you asked for it', and falsification is appropriate.

The eonic effect, thus, is not a theory, but a non-random pattern. It proposes a frequency hypothesis, which could indeed be falsified, check the text of WH&EE. 

Our purpose here is to show how a non-random pattern in history essentially falsifies Darwin's theory of natural selection. Note that Darwin makes it easy for us: he seems to propose a nearly universal 'law of evolution' in natural selection. This is seldom explicitly stated, but the effect is basically that. 

Natural selection proposes to dispense with any macro factor, claiming that microevolution as stated in the theory does the job of the macro process. 

But this is false for history, hence, we argue, for the descent of man. What we do is to demonstrate the eonic effect, show that this exhibits an explicit macro factor. Then we ask, where does evolution stop, and history begin? We see the ambiguity of that question. Clearly it expresses an antinomy, whose resolution would take the form of a series of intermittent transitions, just what we see in history. 

History and the earlier evolution of man are going to be homogenous in some sense. The basic contexts in general would be the same. Hence we are hard pressed to jump to Darwinian conclusions about the Paleolithic, given the eonic effect. 

In any case, by showing that history and evolution overlap, it follows that a non-random pattern in history itself stands as a falsifying form of counterevidence for generalizations about earlier evolution.

To be the issue in a nutshell, the eonic effect induces a reality check. Man's evolution is simply not the 'long wait for random mutations', but an explicit developmental master sequence giving expression to his 'evolution into freedom' in the formal definition of the eonic model.