Einstein's thoughts on evolution - what do you think?

Question

Albert Einstein said..."The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in a print shop."

Answer 1

Evolution isn't "accident", so even if he HAD said this (which I find pretty improbable), he wasn't talking about evolution.

In telling you this, someone deliberately lied to you to get you to accept creationism. How does that make you feel about creationists?

If scientists depended so much on lying to convince others of their claims, I'd have learned long ago to stay clear of science. Shouldn't this be a hint to you that creationism is something to steer clear of? Do you REALLY want to associate yourself with a movement so deeply devoted to lying?

Answer 2

The London Daily Express (August 14, 1981) put the
conclusion of these two scientists into headlines: “Two
skeptical scientists put their heads together and reached
an amazing conclusion: There must be a God.” *Hoyle
and *Wickramasinghe concluded in their book that the
probability of producing life, anywhere in the universe from
evolutionary processes, was as reasonable as getting a fully
operational Boeing 747 jumbo jet from a tornado going
through a junkyard (*Fred Hoyle, Science, November 12,
1981, p. 105). The co-discoverer of the DNA molecule
said this:
“An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available
to us now, could only state that in some sense, the
origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle,
so many are the conditions which would have had to have
been satisfied to get it going.”—*Francis Crick, Life Itself:
Its Origin and Nature (1981), p. 88.

Answer 3

If the probability is less than 1 x 10^50, that is considered impossible.

What is the probability that an explosion in a print shop will produce the Unabridged Dictionary? Certainly less that 1 x 10^50. Hence, impossible.

Edit: Paul S, Bullfighter, science does lie. What is truth one day has to be discarded as false (or at least modified) not so long afterwards. As it relates to macroevolution, evolutionists seem to forget that this hypothesis comes with an a priori commitment. That is, a hypothesis is first accepted and then evidence is sought to support it. That is totally contrary to the scientific method.

Answer 4

A good quote - I'm not sure if Einstein said it first as it's also attributed to - Dr. Erwin Conklin, biologist, Princeton University. Does anyone know if it is an Einstein quote or not?

I've always thought that life follows some complex pattern and seemingly random things are actually just parts of this huge pattern. That doesn't disprove evolution though - Evolution is just a description of the process of species changing and adapting over time.

It is actually possible to believe in evolution and still believe in God. Maybe God just laid down the blueprints for life years ago, lit the blue touch paper and stood back. Who knows? I certainly don't.

EDIT - I'm non-religious so don't believe in God one way or the other. Just thought I'd add that as my answer may have sounded like I was pro creationism. It was actually pro science.

Answer 5

Thats a good one. I had never heard it before. As a pre- ministerial student I had written Einstein a letter asking him about his beliefs. (We had a mutual friend.)He told me that science is nothing but mans attempt to learn the laws of nature created by GOD. There can be no doubt that God created and used evolution in the process of creating our planet and the universe. If you doubt this, think about the process he created to procreate human life. Sex! The female has one egg. ( ok, some times two or three.) But the man has millions of sperm. (so I'm told. I've never tried to count them.) And its just through chance that we were born and not someone else. Jesus spoke in parables hoping that we would search for the truth. Thats what Einstein did. Search for the truth.

Answer 6

Somehow that does not sound like Einstein to me.
You should provide a source for that quote.
------------
Here is another version.
"According to Princeton Biology Professor, Edwin Conklin," The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a print shop."- Reader's Digest Jan.1963 pg.92 ."
http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/lie.html

and another
"The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop."

By: Albert Einstein
Source: Albert Einstein, Catholic Digest, 1991, pg. 2
http://www.ivmdl.org/quotables.cfm?quoteid=800&cat=Witness

Two different appeals to authority with the same quote and a search for it in sites devoted to authentic quotes from him returned no hits.
A search of the Catholic Digest for the quote returned no hits.

I am afraid I must call Bull***t on this one.
Thanks for playing.

Answer 7

If human like extraterrestrial beings existed everywhere, it can be a greater appropriate argument for identity. organic and organic evolution is restricted to this one planet by making use of the expanse of area and the actually ridiculous odds of it even occurring as quickly as, no longer to point two times interior an identical way. hence, the invention of human looking extraterrestrial beings could purely determine that God isn't purely actual, yet is repeating a valuable recipe on better than one planet.

Answer 8

life is much more complex than a dictionary.
That doesnt make it less probable for life to originate from an accident than the letters of a printsshop falling into place.
Because nature obeys certain rules , but letters in a printshop not.
At least not rules that would make them fall on the correct place.

Answer 9

It seems you are putting words into Einsteins mouth. In a thorough search of quotes by Einstein, no where is he credited with the words you list. And since you give no sources yourself I think it fair to call your claim as BS.

Answer 10

no he didn't, it's a corruption of what fred hoyle said, "Order does not spontaneously form from disorder. A tornado passing through a junkyard would never assemble a 747". he was a cosmologist and he later retracted this when the process of abiogenesis was fully explained to him. i can only think that some creationist thought th fred hoyle was too obscure so they substituted einstein for him, they seem prone to doing this sort of thing.