Wow, are YOU confused... Let me guess, you've made the mistake of trying to "learn" about science from the creationists, right? This would explain why you're in such need of my tagline. Hint: Trying to "learn" about science from creationists is like trying to "learn" about conservatism from Michael Moore, and for exactly the same reasons.
To see how laughably wrong your comment is, start with post #61. Then read this. Then move on to this. Then try reading some actual science journals.
Get back to us when you've overcome your complete ignorance on this topic, and your head contains more than just the gross misreprentations of the creationists who are actively attempting to undermine science education. You only give ammunition to the liberals who claim that conservatives are ignorant and scientific illiterates when you say goofy stuff like this. Please stop it.
The fact is that's nowhere near true. It's a completely ignorant claim. Not stupid, mind, but definitely ignorant. Which is O.K. You've probably never read Darwin's works. Most people haven't. Even most modern biologists haven't. But nevertheless the fact is that Darwin put forth numerous lines of argument for both natural selection (his theory of mechanism) and for common descent (the inference that evolution has indeed occurred and that diverse, and probably all, living things are related by ordinary biological reproduction).
With respect to the latter you ignore, just for instance, an entire chapter in the Origin where Darwin marshaled a series of arguments from the facts of biogeography (the geographical distributions of living organisms).
He was probably a Dummie.
You mean a "DUmmie"? No. Politically Darwin was a conservative (in modern terminology, although a "liberal" in 19th Century terminology). He belonged to and was a partisan of the (English version of) the party of Lincoln: The Whig party, which in America became the Republican party.