Banana fallacy
(→Technical points on the video: non-slip surfaces) |
(→Technical points on the video: Well that's leaving out short distance transmission by pulp theives, and dispersal by scatterhoarders, and the seed itself is only truly digested by seed predators) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
* Much of this lecture seems to focus on Ray’s expertise in the manipulation of . . . bananas. (0:11 - 0:24) | * Much of this lecture seems to focus on Ray’s expertise in the manipulation of . . . bananas. (0:11 - 0:24) | ||
* About 0:21 - 0:24, it's not really the banana that has a non-slip surface, it is the hand. The human hand is adapted to hold just about any kind of object, which is why most everyday objects could be classified as "non-slip". | * About 0:21 - 0:24, it's not really the banana that has a non-slip surface, it is the hand. The human hand is adapted to hold just about any kind of object, which is why most everyday objects could be classified as "non-slip". | ||
| − | * About 0:25 - 0:32, fruits are seedpods. The seed is spread via the ingestion | + | * About 0:25 - 0:32, fruits are seedpods. The seed is often spread via the ingestion, and excretion of the fruit by an animal. According to evolutionary theory, any fruit that developed the ability to clearly indicate the ripeness of fruit (i.e., green – too early; yellow - just right; red (where the $*&! did you get that banana?! Some special grocery store?); black – too late) had an advantage reproducing over those that did not, and in time would out-reproduce other members of its own species. |
* Ray has the entire time been ignoring the fact he is holding a banana that has been cultivated ''by humans'' to look appealing ''to humans''. They don't even have seeds any more, they are that highly selectively bred. | * Ray has the entire time been ignoring the fact he is holding a banana that has been cultivated ''by humans'' to look appealing ''to humans''. They don't even have seeds any more, they are that highly selectively bred. | ||
* About 0:32 - 0:42, bananas, unlike citrus fruits, are fairly solid on the inside. It’s unlikely that you would need a pull tab to keep it from squirting you in the face. If easy opening is the key feature of the banana, this raises questions why this feature is not present in other foods: | * About 0:32 - 0:42, bananas, unlike citrus fruits, are fairly solid on the inside. It’s unlikely that you would need a pull tab to keep it from squirting you in the face. If easy opening is the key feature of the banana, this raises questions why this feature is not present in other foods: | ||
Revision as of 18:12, 3 August 2010
The banana fallacy is a specific teleological argument for theism based on the form and function of natural objects. In its usual presentation, it is humorously foolish. According to Ray Comfort, the banana is the atheist's worst nightmare - its ease of use, nutritional value and "colour-coding" are irrefutable proof of intelligent design.
Of course, this ignores the fact that, like many crops humans use, the banana has been intelligently designed - by humans, through artificial selection, to improve its utility to us. The banana was first domesticated around 8,000-9,000 years ago, probably in New Guinea, and wild bananas are small, dry cacao-pod-looking things loaded with inedible seeds. Thus, to say that bananas are naturally designed to be the perfect food for humans is, at best, wishful thinking.
The argument that Ray Comfort presents also ignores the fact that similar logic applies to the human penis[1] due to its size being just right to fit into the human rectum, hand or mouth - which are all definite no-nos for fundies. In fact, one could even argue that the banana was also designed to be put in the human rectum or vagina; it is shaped correctly, and has a protective outer sheath to ensure firmness.
Also note, that if bananas were truly "intelligently designed", they would have raisins in them. And they'd keep indefinitely without going bad or losing their vitamin content. And banoffee varieties. Or have vaccines in them for easier application and distribution or countless other attributes that have been pipe dreams of genetic engineers around the world for years. Someday, perhaps?
Contents |
Banana fellations (Ray Comfort's video explanation, with snark commentary)
Ray was nice enough to post a 64 second video explaining the banana fallacy.
For those of you who can't see embedded youtube, here is the link
Technical points on the video
- First, Ray needs to tighten his delivery. Whenever a fundy preacher takes more than 60 seconds to rebut a complex scientific theory, he runs the risk of confusing his flock.
- Starting at 0:05, Ray says that there are five grooves on the index finger and thumb that correspond to the five ridges on the banana. Actually, there are six grooves within the finger-thumb circle. Comfort counts the two middle joints on the index finger, the middle joint on the thumb, the base joint on the finger and the base joint on the thumb (five joints/grooves). He ignores the groove formed when the tips of the finger and thumb are pressed together.
- Much of this lecture seems to focus on Ray’s expertise in the manipulation of . . . bananas. (0:11 - 0:24)
- About 0:21 - 0:24, it's not really the banana that has a non-slip surface, it is the hand. The human hand is adapted to hold just about any kind of object, which is why most everyday objects could be classified as "non-slip".
- About 0:25 - 0:32, fruits are seedpods. The seed is often spread via the ingestion, and excretion of the fruit by an animal. According to evolutionary theory, any fruit that developed the ability to clearly indicate the ripeness of fruit (i.e., green – too early; yellow - just right; red (where the $*&! did you get that banana?! Some special grocery store?); black – too late) had an advantage reproducing over those that did not, and in time would out-reproduce other members of its own species.
- Ray has the entire time been ignoring the fact he is holding a banana that has been cultivated by humans to look appealing to humans. They don't even have seeds any more, they are that highly selectively bred.
- About 0:32 - 0:42, bananas, unlike citrus fruits, are fairly solid on the inside. It’s unlikely that you would need a pull tab to keep it from squirting you in the face. If easy opening is the key feature of the banana, this raises questions why this feature is not present in other foods:
- Why didn’t God “place a tab at the top” of oranges, grapefruit, lemons, or limes?
- Why didn't God put pull tabs on hard-to-open foods like coconuts, walnuts, hazelnuts, etc.?
- And while we're on the subject of this magic "tab", monkeys (and some people) eat the banana from the other end.[2]
- And, come to think of it, why would Ray think that a banana would squirt in his face?
- At 0:53, Ray demonstrates the proper technique of eating bananas.
- Ray never mentions that bananas only grow between 30 degrees north latitude and 30 degrees south latitude. In fact, many cultures outside of the tropics never saw a banana until well into the twentieth century. Even today, many people have never seen a banana - Jesus certainly wouldn't have. So, if bananas are really such perfect examples of God's handiwork, if they are such a perfect food for humans, then why do they only grow in the tropics where so many people have no easy access to them?
But what's this?
Ray is so taken aback by people laughing at this video that he now claims that it's a hoax by atheists.[3] However watching the full video, Comfort does appear to be discussing how a banana is similar to a soda-drink can and uses that as an analogy for how bananas are evidence of design. The reader can view the scene in context here. Faced with the fact that the entire argument is bollocks, Ray has since backtracked entirely on the banana, claiming that it was satire from the very beginning and now performs the "routine" as comedy.[4]
See also
External links
- Stupid video about atheist rebuttal points. Hey! A YEC looked at this page and made a video! Woohoo!
- Even stupider
- Coconuts, of course, are satanic
Footnotes
- ↑ Thus making it a phallusy
- ↑ World of Monkey.com: It's the last question, but plenty of other quick googles show this. But basically, the monkeys are right, humans do it upside down.
- ↑ According to his own blog (retrieved 13 March 2009)
- ↑ Why Do People Laugh At Creationists (Part 31)