Charles Darwin Offensive?

There seems to be an element of glee in the claim that the Natural History Museum (NHM) is to review its exhibits that relate to Charles Darwin and his Theory of Evolution, on the grounds that they may cause 'offense' (https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1332122/natural-history-museum-review-charles-darwin-blm-protests-offensive). The claim is that the Black Lives Matter (BLM) campaign would support a re-evaluation of the displays (although I have not heard that this is a major item on their agenda, in spite of what the newspaper's claim). Somewhat bizarrely, the American Christian Right is also bouncing up and down, blaming Darwin (a pseudo-Scientist in their eyes) for dividing humans into races (although it actually seems that they want the whole theory abandoned, to be replaced by creationism). Darwin was a real scientist who collected material together to support a hypothesis he had developed using evidence from around the world in which he lived. I think it is a bit harsh to label him as a 'colonialist', simply because he visited the Galapagos Islands (off Eduador), as part of his quest. I can't remember him (or his immediate family) being linked to slavery (I appreciate that it has been some time since I read 'The Origin of the Species'or his other books). His basic claim was that new species could be produced by natural selection (i.e. ecological factors can produce changes in species, as the organisms that do best in those circumstances, will leave more offspring in the next generation, producing gradual change).Certainly, Darwin's view accepts that having a wide range of genetic possibilities is good for a species. It gives it the ability to deal with environmental changes. I don't think that he would have seen 'race' (a very dodgy concept anyhow) as a hierarchy with some races being superior to others (although he was a Victorian with all the baggage that that entails). Darwin's main focus was the species and all humans are the same species (a point that he recognised). I also don't think that you can blame Darwin for Eugenetics, as that was a development pushed by other folk and would have involved artificial selection. As far as I understand it, the BMNS displays are mainly designed to illustrate how Darwin got the evidence to support the Theory (as the vast majority of Biologists take it now as a truism) of Evolution. My advice (if this needed it) to NHM (an important movement) is not to allow themselves to be side-tracked into issues like this as it just gives their opponents something to beat them with. The spat seems to be a continuation of the fuss over the singing of 'Rule Brittania' at the proms. There are much more obvious targets for their anger than Charles Darwin.