was Einstein ever proven completely wrong?

No, not completely. Many of his theories remain intact.

But he was wrong when he stated to the effect "God does not leave things to chance." The quote is probably not accurate, but close enough to indicate Einstein's disdain for the nature of quantum mechanics, which are highly probabilistic in nature.

He was also wrong when he initially assumed a static universe. We've subsequently found that the universe is actually expanding...at an accelerating rate (maybe).

I throw in "maybe" because there are some new theories wherein the universe is considered nonuniform resulting in volumes of universe contracting at different rates; thereby, giving the illusion of acceleration from the faster contracting volumes by the slower contracting volumes. The rate of contraction depends on the amount of mass contained in the volumes of space. More mass mean faster contraction due to greater gravity. [See source.]

There are some other areas of Einstein's theories where new theories have suggested he was wrong. But I don't remember the details. I'm sure you can find them on the web.

BTW: I find bire2u's answer intriguing. I've long proposed that light (i.e., photons) are not massless, but consist of very very tiny mass that travel at some very very small increment less than Einstein's c value, e.g., in E = mc^2. That would be consistent with the Japanese theory cited.

As ludicrous as this might sound, consider that we thought electron neutrinos were massless and traveled at the speed of light only a decade ago. Now we know that they have a tiny bit of mass and travel at very slightly less than c.

Bottom line, there's a lot more to be learned in physics.

There has been recent research proving that light might not have a defined upper velocity. If this proves out, then Einsteins relativity theories would be in serious jeopardy.

Here is a excerpt from a Japanese physicist that wrote a book on light:

Among physicists, it is widely assumed that one's greatest chance for a breakthrough discovery will come before one reaches the age of 30. True or not, this idea leads young physicists such as João Magueijo to pull out all the intellectual stops in the search for glory and immortality. In Faster Than the Speed of Light, Magueijo reveals the short, brilliant history of his possibly groundbreaking speculation--VSL, or Variable Light Speed. This notion--that the speed of light changed as the universe expanded after the Big Bang--contradicts no less prominent a figure than Albert Einstein

Yes, on a couple of issues (ie, The "static universe" Einstein proposed was proven wrong by Edwin Hubble...we live in an expanding Universe.)

No.

in fact, with experiments on the Space Shuttles, almost everything Einstein proposed has been proven true.

He was proven wrong once, as far as I know.

When quantum mechanics was first developed, physicists separated into two groups, one which followed classical mechanics, and the idea that if you knew every detail about every particle at a particular moment in time, you could calculate exactly what everything would be like at any future time, and the other which followed quantum mechanics, and the idea that it's impossible to know everything about a particle, and that you can never say for certain that something will happen - there's just a probability.

Einstein pretty much headed up the classical physicists...and lost in the end, as quantum mechanics was shown to be true!

no way. are u kidding? all his theories were questioned by many, but were never proven wrong. such as the wave-particle duality, the photoelectric effect, and so on.. later experiments confirmed that einstein's theories always worked after all.

circulate forward and postulate that Birds did no longer evolve from reptiles nonetheless the DNA data ought to get interior the way, to no longer point out fossils (oops isn't certainty a *****) showing feathered dinosaurs. to no longer point out all the fossile birs that have been uncovered. considering 1990, extra advantageous than thrice as many chicken fossils courting from the Cretaceous have been chanced on than have been discovered interior the previous 2 centuries. whilst quite some the chicken lineages that arose during the Cretaceous died out, a number of them survived to gave upward push to the spectacular variety of birds we see immediately. yet another minor project you may have is the Therapods. Many traits that typify birds have been modern-day interior the theropods earlier birds stepped forward, mutually with hollow bones, a wishbone, a backward-pointing pelvis, and a three-toed foot. interior the path of theropod evolution, the forelimbs and palms grew to become gradually longer. In some theropods, the bones of the wrist took on a shape that allowed the joint to flex sideways. this could have allowed those animals to whip their long palms forward in a speedy snatching action, possibly to capture prey. The wishbone in theropods served to anchor the muscle tissues that pulled the forelimb forward in this grabbing stream -- a action that smart prognosis shows to be quite much comparable to the flight stroke of present day birds. Theropods, nonetheless, in all probability remained usually on the floor. nevertheless sturdy success, yet undergo in concepts merely considering you "teach" that they did no longer evolve from reptiles does no longer recommend god did it! Oh and if an evolutioist is somebody that believes in evolution is a creatioist a cretin?