Nope. Darwin was just bluffing - just like he was bluffing about the eye, about the fossils, and about all the objections to his theory. He did not prove anything, all he did was try to put the burden of proof where it did not belong - on his opponents. When one proposes a theory, the burder of proof is on the proponent.
You also ignore the incorrect predictions by Darwin which are central to the theory of evolution. The man was no scientist. He was, as I have said - a charlatan.
How do you know he was bluffing. Some special relationship with him that none of us had?
Unlike Biblical inerrantists, he pointed out a hole in his theory and admitted that opponents could use that to take it down, practically inviting them to go for it. It was also somewhat of an invitation for later generations to try to patch up that hole that he himself couldn't -- and they did as in the like I gave you.