We conclude by noting that by the nature of the case the new evolution that we have found resorts the deck and our habitual statements to the effect that 'man evolved in the Paleolithic' and then entered history should now be revised to consider that a continuous stream of hominid microevolution underwent a series of macro intervals, one of which might been visible in the earlier era of  man, e.g. the evidences, if any, of a 'great explosion', another of which we have clearly detected in world history itself. That leaves the question of the meaning of the term 'man' up in the air, so to speak, since it might be true that man's evolution is thus far incomplete, or that his passage from evolution to free history is incomplete, and can only be completed in the wake of a macro series. We should reflect on the many possibilities and insights that arrive with our new model and its implication that 'man' as he is not yet man, and that either further macroevolution will come in the future, or that man's emerging freedom is sufficient to replace the generated series. But in any case, we can see that we have found a resolution of the problems of natural selection, with a genuine revision of what we mean by evolution, macro and micro, and that if we examine history itself, the play of natural selection is simply something else. 

Top