The three-card monte shark loves people to make such assumptions -- it pays his bills.
Sort of like how the dummies send their money to the creationists' website on the assumption that those guys actually have something of worth to buy?
This is nonsense. Evolutionists claim (correctly) that evolution follows certain (very complex) guiding rules, though without a predefined outcome. The randomness enters the equation due to the absence of a predetermined outcome, not due to the absence of a predefined method. If the 'coin' of evolution comes up fifty times heads, it is not because the coin was determined to come up fifty times heads, but rather because the nature of the coin is such between each toss that a result of heads is far more likely than a result of tails and there is insufficient external impetus to elevate the odds of tails.
Stated differently, if you have fifty kids the odds are excellent that all fifty of them will be human, and not any one of the other millions of species on earth, although the random odds of this result are infinitesimal. You can quantify this if you'd like (the random odds are roughly one in 5 × 10300, which might as well be infinitesimal, and sound even more absurd than your silly coins; the true odds are roughly 1:1) but it contains an inherent and obvious non sequitur. The reason why all 50 results will probably be human is because it is your nature to have human progeny, although there is a slight chance that one or more of the progeny will be an incremental step toward a future result of 'tails'...
Evolution involves not having fifty kids - which is analogous to fifty coin tosses - but rather having a lineage of fifty generations, which is analogous to a series of coin tosses where each succeeding toss is highly likely to approximate the preceding toss with a slight chance of variation within given parameters that may accummulate over time under reinforcement.