OK, much as I believe in evolution, what you're saying here is simply not true. Evolution takes place over time scales so long that humanity as we know it has not been around for long enough to observe it directly in nature, even if the first humans had somehow innately had knowledge of the scientific method as we currently understand it (which they didn't, so the time we've been able to look is in fact even shorter). Even in the lab, while we have been able to engineer situations similar to those currently thought to drive evolution, we have not observed evolution itself: in particular, speciation still eludes us.
The other problem with your post is that you haven't really addressed the issue you're replying to, because what you've mentioned has nothing to do with falsification. You can't test the power of my tiger-repelling rock by showing that there are no tigers in the area. You have to put me in a tiger cage with the rock and watch me get eaten (or, if the tigers don't come near me, then maybe there's something to the rock after all. Or maybe not; further experiments will be needed). What you mention here is like demonstrating the power of the rock by claiming that there are no tigers in the area. The opposite is another problem that has thus far eluded biologists: how do you construct an experiment that would fail if evolution as we currently understand it were not true? That's still being worked on.
Failed experiments are not sexy. They do not get you grants, and so scientists don't like them (which is not an entirely selfish thing: even scientists have to eat). But when you're doing basic scientific research, your failed experiments are even more important than your successful ones, because they're the ones that actually allow you to eliminate possibilities. Our current obsession with successful experiments is one of ways in which contemporary scientific practice is fundamentally broken.
Make no mistake, I believe in evolution. But the mental discipline required by science is very, very high, and right now, you look like you fall short of the mark. Confidence, even very high confidence, is one thing, but there's a step beyond confidence which may well be the only thing science forbids. And it looks like you have taken it.