First link, out of date data by about 150 years, Darwin was actually proven MORE correct after he died.
Second link; so if I had a 3000 year old ficticious book based on reality, does that actually prove the contents of the book, or does it just prove the book existed?
Neither of these points validate anything IN the book, they just prove IT ITSELF is old.
EDIT: You still aint answered my post in the other thread about the transitional links in our bodies right now (appendix, tail bone, most of our tonsils) since your hating on Darwin so much. God just give us pointless organs/structures?