Prove it. Show the studies.
The studies have been linked to on other threads dealing with the speed of light.
As to Darwin, his theory was based on personal experience and observation of evolution within a species from which he extrapolated evolution from species to species.
You will probably disagree with this article and others I can link to, but I found this an interesting observation:
The first and most important thing we should understand is that evolutionists begin with the assumption that man has in fact evolved from apes. No paleoanthropologist (one who studies the fossil evidence for man's origin) would dare to seriously raise the question "did man evolve from apes?" The only permissible question is "from which apes did man evolve?" Since evolutionists generally do not believe that man evolved from any ape that is now living, they look to extinct apes in the fossil record to provide them with their desired evidence. Specifically, they look for any anatomical feature that looks "intermediate" between that of apes and man. Fossil apes having such features are declared to be ancestral to man (or at least collateral relatives) and are called hominids. Living apes, on the other hand, are not considered to be "hominids" they only sort of look like humans. Still, evolutionists are willing to accept certain trivial similarities between extinct apes and men as "proof" of ancestry.
http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro19.html
When any researchers starts out to “prove” a "theory" based on a preconceived concept should his conclusions be accepted as valid and “scientific”.