Well, maybe the “year of Darwin” was a mistake for the evolutionsts then — if they don’t believe what Darwin taught.
Sometimes if you worship a guy with a big anniversary celebration, you just might be accused of having some affinity with him.
Intelligent people would realize that a person can be celebrated without (a) believing everything he said, and (b) believing only what he said. Are you saying you don't realize that?
This method of refuting something of Darwin and then claiming that invalidates anything he said or any theory that incorporates part of his work is akin to the tactic of saying that because George Washington was a slaveholder, he and America are without moral grounding.
They can drag the red herrings all around, but it just stinks up the place and doesn't change reality.