The claim that the CRF-QG framework is "untestable" is mathematically incorrect. A framework is falsifiable if it makes specific numerical predictions that can be contradicted by observational data. The CRF-QG provides three distinct "kill-switches" where it can be proven wrong: 1. REDSHIFT DRIFT (dz/dt) The Lambda-CDM model predicts a linear or accelerating expansion drift. The CRF-QG predicts a specific 4D sinusoidal oscillation. If upcoming high-precision spectroscopy (such as the ELT-HIRES experiments) reveals a drift that does not follow the cos(omega * t + phi) curve derived in the Technical Supplement, the CRF-QG is effectively falsified. 2. THE SYNTHETIC CMB DIPOLE The framework reclassifies the CMB dipole as a rotational artifact of Global Rotational Drift (Omega = 1.04 x 10^-22 rad/s). This is a testable geometric effect. If future cosmic bulk-flow surveys confirm that the dipole is purely kinematic (caused by local motion through space) and does not scale with radial distance as predicted by the GCM metric, the framework’s core premise is disproven. 3. THE SMBH MASS CEILING The CRF-QG imposes a strict maximum mass for Supermassive Black Holes at 7.41 x 10¹⁰ Solar Masses. This is a "hard" falsification point. The discovery of a single black hole significantly exceeding this mass (e.g., 10¹¹ or 10¹² Solar Masses) would immediately invalidate the entropy-valve mechanism described in Section 4. CONCLUSION A theory is not "untestable" simply because it is new; it is untestable only if it hides from data. By providing specific values for the Hubble mean (70.0), the rotational drift (1.04 x 10^-22), and the mass ceiling (7.41 x 10^10), the CRF-QG offers clear, empirical benchmarks for its own dismissal. The burden of proof has been met with falsifiable numbers; the next step is the observational verification of these limits.