Is every word of Charles Darwin pure nonsense? Aren't his theories just fake news?

Having read his books his theories sound plausible to me

Yes.

Of course not.

IDK,but I think he got his name correct.

You would like that.

You would like that because you blame Charles Darwin for threatening your religion (I can't see any other reasons for your attitude).

But you're wrong. Darwin didn't invent evolution! He only explained how already observed evolution works (hence "theory").

Whatever Darwin, you or I think about how species came to be, even if Darwin's theory (= explanation) was false, evolution happens and has happened for billions of years

No. It works too well to be false (fake news)

The worldwide scientific research community from over the past 150 years has discovered that no known hypothesis other than universal common descent can account scientifically for the unity, diversity, and patterns of terrestrial life. This hypothesis has been verified and corroborated so extensively that it is currently accepted as fact by the overwhelming majority of professional researchers in the biological and geological sciences (AAAS 1990; AAAS 2006; GSA 2009; NAS 2005; NCSE 2012; Working Group 2001). No alternate explanations compete scientifically with common descent, primarily for four main reasons: (1) so many of the predictions of common descent have been confirmed from independent areas of science, (2) no significant contradictory evidence has yet been found, (3) competing possibilities have been contradicted by enormous amounts of scientific data, and (4) many other explanations are untestable, though they may be trivially consistent with biological data.

I do not understand why you would pose this question when it is clear you have read nothing he wrote. Despite the disadvantages he faced Darwin was very accurate. His principal disadvantage being the science of genetics effectively did not exist at the time. Yet much of what Darwin could only speculate has been found to be true.

It is also clear to me that you do not understand what the term 'theory' means in science. It is very different to its idiomatic use. May be you reject evolution from a religious perspective. That is your prerogative. However, to say evolution is only a theory inferring it has no evidence only makes one appear incredibly silly.

No, no, and no.

Selection being a mechanism of evolution was a very good idea -- so good that Darwin almost got scooped by Wallace.

1) No.

2) No.

Biological evolution is observable, testable and repeatable. There is evidence in physics, geology, archaeology, history, chemistry and every one of the many dozens of branches of biological science.

----- -----

It is notable that those who refuse to acknowledge biological evolution do so because their religion forbids accepting it.

It is incongruous of religions to demand evidence, reject it when presented and then offer no testable evidence for things of which they teach such as angels, souls, heaven, spirits, demons, hell, deities, afterlife etc.

No.

And no.