Is it? Is it really? Well, no. Of course it isn't. What any informed and open-minded person understands is that any 'evidence', when taken in complete isolation, can seem persuasive. What explanation does Ray Comfort - the chap in the video - give for the shapes of apples or grapes or melons? They're hardly 'perfectly shaped for the hand'. And what about the fruits that don't have a helpful 'soda can tab' to open them with like oranges, apricots or pomegranates? That looks like an oversight on the part of God. 'It's curved towards the face for ease of eating'? Unless it's pointing the other way of course. Additionally, if Comfort had any research skills whatsoever and had travelled a bit more widely, he'd know that not all bananas are that shape or even that colour. Many have no ridges 'shaped for the human hand'. In Sri Lanka I ate stubby green and red bananas (which is why banana food colouring is red) which were round in cross-section. Extraordinarily, the banana he chooses as his 'proof' is a seedless yellow variety trained to grow like that by selective breeding. Its existence proves that evolution and the process of natural selection - even when forced by gene-fiddling human horticultural practice - is quite real.
This video shows just how desperate claims can be when they are made without the benefit of good science behind them. Facts are swept aside when they don't fit the tunnel-vision Creationist worldview. Using the same intuition shown by this chap, I could claim evidence for God's hand in the design of anything. What about the coconut? It provides edible flesh and drinkable water. The water is isotonic and can be used as plasma in humans. The coarse hair can be used for matting, the leaves can be woven into material and you can make boats from the trunks of the trees. The root and milk can be used to brew a potent alcoholic drink called arack. Oh, and the shells of the nut can be used as bowls, simple bras or to make horsey clip-clop noises. There you go. Much better example than a banana.
Except ... if God made it specifically for us, why put the nuts so high up in the tree so we have to risk our lives to get them? And why make the shells so hard to crack? And aren't the nuts actually designed to perpetuate the species rather than feed us? Like the banana, if they were made solely for us, then surely they'd just spring up all over the place rather than get involved in all that beastly reproduction nonsense? If God can create whole universes, he could surely make coconut palms immortal and ever-fruitful?
You see, these are the types of questions that Creationists never answer. Science has an answer for why things are the way they are. Creationism has nothing but 'I believe God did it'. What the wilfully ignorant never explain is why a sane, rational, omnipotent god (or gods) would take such a circuitous route to design living things. Why do we need to die? Why not just make things perfect and make them live forever? Why have such a complex intake and excretory system? Why not make us run on air and water? Why cover animals with tricky fur and feathers? Why not fit them with a handy soda can tab?
And why so many silly mistakes? Why were we created 'in his image' with wisdom teeth and appendixes? Why only one heart and brain - arguably the two most important organs - but two of almost everything else? Why are perfectly innocent kids born with defects and deformities? Why use the same organs for sex and excretion? That's like building a playground in a sewage farm.
I am all for open and fair discussion. But the kind of ill-considered and, frankly, misleading nonsense dished out by bananaman and his chums does no one any favours - Creationists included. And think that video was bad? Watch this one ... What have the 'filthy animals' done to deserve such vitriol?
Okay, I'll let you in on the joke; this second video is a spoof made by atheist comedian Edward Current (see more of his stuff here). What's scary, however, is that his video is almost indistinguishable from most Creationist videos I've seen. It's fooled many people. It fooled me the first time I saw it. It might well have fooled you too.
The fact is that I'd rather be a free-thinking filthy animal than a blinkered and indoctrinated zealot any day.