No, but I can point you to his book and instruct you to actually read it. Darwin himself was not sure of his theory, and in fact Darwinism has been rejected by most scientists. Neo-Darwinism reigned for a short time and now there is the theory of Punctuated equilibrium. This is also known as the hopeful monster theory. They keep changing the rules for evolution because they can't prove it happened, so they change the theory and try to manufacture more "facts" to fit the theory. I am not religious, I am however a right wing conservative and I have strong doubts about evolution. As to peoples saying that a species doesn't have to die out to evolve, it only takes the IQ of a 2 year old to realize that all of a species must upgrade or they won't survive. "IF" evolution is true then there would be no apes or other species that supposedly upgraded to a better species. There are no transitional species, they have all been proven fake or mistakes, and this is why evolutionists ( the real ones, the scientists) are scrambling and changing the theory every 50 or so years to fit the fossils they find while at the same time still touting Darwinisim to the people. Get an open mind and look at both sides. Explain the cambrian explosian if you will, why all the life is such a short time, well developed and fully formed with no species behind them to explain their existence. This has never been explained by anyone and most evolutionists gave up trying because it makes them look bad. Also, no one has yet explained or proven how life actually started and this is the big kicker against darwinisim. The primordial soup crap has not proven out. Life did not start that way but of course evolutionists have chosen to ignore that too and set it aside because it doesn't fit with their theories. In short, evolutionists are much like liberals, they will lie, cheat and manufacture evidence to show that they are right, because they must be. There is just to much evidence against evolution and it keeps growing. I will keep an open mind until things change. I am not religious and don't attend church and have my doubts about an all powerful God, but at the same time I do not buy into evolution with the evidence that is available now, the real evidence not the stuff shoved onto us, by guess who?, the MSM and liberal scientists.
"Darwinism" has not been rejected by most scientists. Punctuated eqilibrium was actually predicted by Darwin and does not refute evolution, but simply modifies it under certain circumstances. If you got your science from other than creationist sources you'd know this.
You need to read it, not just the ICR/AiG strawman characterizations thereof. While he posed one rhetorical question after another which has been dishonestly quote-mined by Holy Warrior idiots who imagine themselves allowed to lie in a good cause, he was in fact totally confident of his conclusions. It's in there; you haven't read it.
He also anticipated punctutated equilibrium to an extent not appreciated by PE founders Gould and Eldredge. I'm sure this will be news to you as well.