Never heard of him. Never mentioned him.
Actually,
you did. Or are you admitting that you weren't even paying attention to that to which you were responding? In any case, I
pointed out your error, and I did mention his last name, so you did hear of him then at least. You then said
"Read the article. He rejects it." and finally I
quoted from the article which read "He accepts Darwinian evolution".
You never bothered replying after that. Apparently you couldn't handle having it shown that you are a decrepit liar.
Whoops, I didn't completely follow the chain of replies. You did actually respond to my "He accepts Darwinian evolution", but you didn't concede the point. Instead,
you completely ignored my quoting of the article that flatly contradicted your lie and instead launched an ad hominem against me, telling me to "Take a deep breath and read the article again ... . " (ironic now that it seems that you didn't read the article at all).
I was right in having the last word, however, as
I responded again bringing up the full quote wherein it was stated flat-out that Antony Flew accepts Darwinian evolution. I even went so far as to address a potential objection to my analysis of the quote, but you weren't even smart enough to try attacking it on the hypothetical angle that I suggested.
So, to recap:
You claimed that Antony Flew had "abandon[ed] their godless and ridiculous hypothesis of evolution."
I point out that the article makes no such claim.
You reiterate your initial claim, telling me to "Read the article. He rejects it."
I do re-read the article. Once again, I see "He accepts Darwinian evolution." So now I have demonstrated without any doubt that the article does not make the claim that you said that it makes. Rather than acknowledging your error, you restate your initial claim. As such, I can now only conclude that you are nothing but a shameless liar, you don't care about truth at all, and nothing that you say can be trusted. Apparently your faith in your religion is so weak that you have to outright deny reality and tell lies to other people to prop it up.
Feel free to counter explaining exactly how you weren't lying before, though I doubt that you will do anything but launch in another ad hominem and/or a dishonest evasion of the issue.