There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
Is the banana argument
- THIS GUY RIGHT HERE ^ Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- Glad you like it (22.214.171.124 in disguise).
If god is'nt real explain Rount Mushmore?
- The first derivative of Godwin's Law - 'The person who first mentions Hitler/Stalin/other 'kneejerk bad guy' without justification automatically loses the argument.
- The first derivative of the first derivative - saying 'I though this was supposed to be RATIONAL wiki!' loses the argument.
Arguments against the banana argument
Only humans use the "tab" on bananas
It just occurred to me that Ray's "argument" has the "tab" on the wrong side of the banana - monkeys and apes (specifically the natural-banana-eaters with hands) actually open it from the other end, by pinching the "nub" between thumb and index finger - causing it to split.
A quick google will show many videos of the practice in action - and most people agree it's far less likely to "smoosh"[sic] the banana from leverage than the "tab" method is.
It might be worth including this in the article to further point out how ludicrous the "godly" design of the banana is? Feel free to ignore the suggestion though - just thought you folks might find the "bottom-opening bananas" interesting :P 126.96.36.199 (talk) 09:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)