Reality has two aspects: time and frequency. It means that present can be described in two equally true ways: continuously and discretely.
So, what does this fact say about history? How can it be described? Well, if history is distinct from present, then history has to be described as a series of “presents”, between which change takes place. If, on the other hand, history is not distinct from present, then history is a paradox by being “present” (ie, change). The problem with the former is that it transfers change from reality into the description of reality, thereby being orthogonally (ie, perpendicularly) ambiguous in relation to reality, meaning that it can’t describe continuity consistently, whereas the problem with the latter is that paradoxes can’t be real (ie, that any such description is contradictory per definition). This fact thus says that history can only be described continuously ambiguously or paradoxically contradictory, whereof the former is called nominalism and the latter is called realism.
The fact that reality has two aspects thus means that present can’t be described unambiguusly and thus that history can’t be described continuously unambiguously. It thus means that a single “true” description of evolution is impossible. We simply can’t put down in words a single true description of our rational idea of how we (humans) originated per definition!? Isn’t that the grand fleer from reality against rationality? It is impossible to describe consistently what we rationalists are convinced must have happened.