In 1799, Goethe in commentary to Schiller about Crebillon said the following:
- “Crebillon … treats the passions like playing cards, that one can shuffle, play, reshuffle, and play again, without their changing at all. There is no trace of the delicate, chemical affinity, through which they attract and repel each other, reunite, neutralize [each other], separate again and recover.”
In other words, the "passions", which result in sexual selection, are not the result of the shuffling of playing cards or the role of dice. The memo, however, has not yet filtered forward to the modern century, aside from the anti-change evolutionists, despite the fact that Goethe's metamorphosis theory was the main precursor to Darwin's evolution theory.
- “As the accidental evolutionist theory has been expanding over the last 100 years, it has been merged with ‘big bang’ and ‘primordial soup’ theories. Combined these ancillary theories, the accidental evolution theory now states that following the big bang, life spontaneously arose from chemicals. What is curious is that these chemicals somehow supposedly developed the desire to survive. Have we ever observed any lifeless chemicals develop a desire to survive? Have we ever seen chemicals doing anything but predictably reacting to each other? In other words, the accidental evolution theory says that out of lifeless chemicals single-celled living creatures have arisen, miraculously displaying a desire to survive. A desire to survive means having a need to improve survival factors and eliminate threats to survival. The need to improve survival means there is an intention to survive, and a value is put onto survival. Eliminating the threats to survival means survival is valued enough to put an effort into changing, adapting to, or destroying potential encroachments and dangers that could shorten life. These factors compound the problem presented: how could lifeless chemicals develop the ability to even recognize life, let alone value life enough to take persistent action to sustain it.”
In 2008, Adams, in his The Science of Truth, likewise refers to the "accidental evolutions" as follows:
- “Why would a lifeless or previously lifeless bag of chemicals decide it was important that future generations even exist, let alone improve their chances of survival? While we might quickly assume that living organisms would want to produce offspring with grater chances of survival, there is no rational reason for this desire. Why would a selfishly motivated newly living organism care about a future generation? First accidental evolutionists make a huge leap assuming that life somehow spontaneously generated from chemicals. Then they make a huge leap that these newly living chemicals somehow preferred survival and pain as opposed to a painless existence of nonlife. Then they make another huge leap by assuming that these newly living chemicals could and would want to dilute their strength to produce offspring that require only trouble and work to maintain. They against all odds, evolution theory proponents take the leap in assuming that these newly living chemicals somehow created an ‘unselfish gene’ that somehow passed on improvements for the future survival of future generations who do nothing for that newly living chemical itself. All of this was done by newly living chemicals that not much different in substance from their dead chemical cousins? The only answer accidental evolutionists seem to give us to these questions is that this all must have been a series of random accidents.”
In 2010, Mark Pagel, an English mathematician, and "accidental evolutionist", interested in comparative anthropology, at Reading University, argued that the origin of new species by natural selection is entirely the result of “accident” or a role of the dice, as illustrated below:
In 2013, Henry Gee, a paleontologist, in his The Accidental Species: Misunderstandings of Human Evolution, attempts to argue, similar to Pagel, that the origin of new species is the result of chance and accident.
The problem with these types of conjectures, is that they are made by people lacking in fundamental education in chemical thermodynamics, the science that defines how new "species" are "selected" according to "nature". Fundamentally educated evolutions, such as Lawrence Henderson, Alfred Lotka, Harold Blum, or Norman Dolloff, give the correct picture. In plane speak, chemical reactions do not occur by "accident". The same is the case for the rest of the occurrences in the universe.
The following are quotes:
- “I never did anything worth doing by accident, nor did any of my inventions come by accident; they came by work.”
- “There is no such thing as accident; it is fate misnamed.”
- — Napoleon Bonaparte (c.1810), Publication
- “I cannot believe that a Rotifer or Tardigrade is adapted to its humble conditions of life by a happy accident.”
- “That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collections of atoms.”
- “If the solar system was brought about by an ‘accidental’ collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents—the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts—i.e. of materialism and astronomy—are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents.”
- — Clive Lewis (c.1950), Publication 
- “I’m not an accident, gentleman. You may be. I am not. I am not an accident. I am an event. And you are events. And what does this mean. An event is something that comes in its—into existence under its own name. And that’s what the Bible says. It’s as true as it has ever been. And you can say that Darwin is an event in the history of the human mind a catastrophe. The infamous pride of a natural scientist to explain his own existence, by accident. Why should I listen to a man who says he’ accident? He’s an accident, I’m another accident, so we never agree. But the fact is we want to agree. Charles Darwin is very important, because he spoke. And we have to make something on him. We have to refute him. So how is he an accident? You see, he’s a duty. I have to get rid of him, or I have to reconcile myself to him.”
- — Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy (1953), “Cross of Reality” 
- “The generating nucleic acid molecules, and therefore all resulting proteins, were, in the period in question, simple by comparison with today's giant and remarkable effective structures. Nevertheless, once in a thousand or a million times that accidental changes in droplet chemistry permitted protein manufacture to occur, the specific molecular structure of nucleic acid that happened to be in the droplet might have resulted in a structure of the derived protein provided catalytic properties contributing to some increase in growth rate through the host droplet period .”
- “Today's children are taught by our culture that we are a cosmic accident. Something slithered out of the primal slime and over billions of years evolved into a human being. We are cousins, ten times removed, to the ape at the zoo eating his own excrement.”
- — Gary Bauer (1992), Our Journey Home (pg. 131) 
- Gee, Henry. (2013). The Accidental Species: Misunderstandings of Human Evolution. Publisher.
- (a) Winnett, Susan. (1993). Terrible Sociability: the Text of Manners in Laclos, Goethe, and James (pg. 220). Stanford University Press.
(b) Lynch, Sandra. (2005). Philosophy and Friendship (Crebillon, pg. 37). Edinburgh University Press.
(c) Steer, Alfred G. (1990). Goethe’s Elective Affinities: the Robe of Nessus (Crebillon, pg. 37; symbolically, pg. 158). Winter.
(d) Passions like playing cards – Hmolpedia 2020.
- C.W. Adams – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Adams, C.W. (2006). Actuality: Life in the Real World (§:How could Chemicals have a Desire to Survive , pgs. 84-85; §:Chemicals Cannot Decide to Extend Their Successor’s Lives”, pgs. 86-87). Publisher.
- Adams, C.W. (2008). The Science of Truth (pg. 159). Publisher.
- Holmes, Bob. (2010). “Accidental Origins: Where Species Come From”, The New Scientist, Mar 10.
- Accident – BrainyQuote.com.
- Darwin, Charles. (1872). “Letter to Alfred Wallace” (Ѻ), Aug 28.
- (a) Russell, Bertrand. (1903). “A Free Man’s Worship”, T.B. Mosher, 1923.
(b) Russell, Bertrand. (1961). “A Free Man’s Worship”, in: R.E. Egner and L.D. Dennon, eds., The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell 1903-1959. Simon and Schuster.
- Lewis, Clive. (2007). The Complete: C.S. Lewis Signature Classics (pg. #). Harper.
- Rosenstock-Huessy, Eugen. (1953). “Cross of Reality” (pg. 21), Vol 5, Lecture 14, Dec 4.
- Wooldridge, Dean. (1968). Mechanical Man: the Physical Basis of Intelligent Life (pg. 26). McGraw-Hill
- (a) Bauer, Gary. (1992). Our Journey Home ("cosmic accident", pg. 131). Word Publications.
(b) Bauer, Gary. (2013). “End of Day Report”, Aug 22.
(b) Gary Bauer – BrainyQuote.com.
- Davies, Paul. (1982). The Accidental Universe. CUP.
- Accident – Hmolpedia 2020.