LOL!
Nobody's mentioned Thermodynamics lately, either.
That one lie really bothers me, though. In part because it's been so thoroughly debunked, even by creationist sites, and in part because it's not relevant.
Even if Darwin had "found religion" and somehow decided to deny his own work on his deathbed, it wouldn't change the validity of the theory. It wouldn't change the evidence. It wouldn't change the support. It wouldn't change the reality.
And yet, they keep dragging that old lie out as though it could possibly mean anything even if true. The ultimate in wishful thinking.
That's because they don't have the first clue what science is. They imagine that "Darwinism" is a religion that relies on nothing but Darwin's "revelations" (plus a few bogus fossils like Piltdown Man). That's how they see it. Looking at things that way, if Darwin had denied evolution, that would cause his followers to doubt their "faith." An analogy would be if Moses had, on his deathbed, confessed that he made up the story about getting the Ten Commandments from God.
Alas for the creationists, Darwin's work isn't theology; it's science. It relies on objectively verifiable data. Therefore his personal recantation wouldn't mean anything -- even if he actually had lost his marbles at the end and reverted to creationism. Just as Galileo's actual recantation doesn't change anything about the evidence for the solar system.