Original sentence: Alternatively, from a Creationist point of view, one website claims "Christians have enough scientific evidence for Creation and against evolution without resorting to stories that can not (sic) be verified.Seen from a mainstream scientific point of view, the Lady Hope Story is a lie in a long string of lies from Creationists, and not a very good one at that.Whether or not Darwin did actually recant, the Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection, with subsequent improvements, remains the central unifying paradigm of biology and is not doubted by the scientific community
Edited sentence: (And if they had existed, where did THEY come from.)  From a purely non-religious and objective stance, the evidence for Darwin's ideas (and ideas is what they are) just doesn't add up.A Christian against a non-Christian.So it's one person's word against another.The fact does remian that there is much scientific and historical evidence against many of Darwin's claims in his early life.The facts are that a Christian person, who thinks that lying is wrong and that one should not lie, says that she led Darwin to Christ (and why not...it is on one's death bed that one begins to think about what will happen in the afterlife).The other fact is that his agnostic family (who may or may not have been there) says the conversion did not occur.The thing to keep in mind is that one will never really know whether or not this story is true.There are no transitional fossils that show humans evolved from apes; there is no evidence for macro-evolution; the fact that life comes from life shows Darwin's idea of the origin of man to be false; NASA scientists have proven that the gases that Darwin said were present during the Big Bang (methane, amonia, hydrogen) did not exist in significant amounts enough to begin a "Big Bang" of life.There had to be a beginning