Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jennifer Nicole on March 11, 2010 at 1:28pm

Heard of him before. I can't really say much, other than laugh at him. I'd love to get a free copy of On the Origin of Species, though, regardless of what kind of introduction it contains. Unfortunately, he prefers to give them at large universities, and I preferred to attend small ones.

I do recall the banana argument in a different video on youtube. And then someone explained that the bananas people eat have been changed from what they originally looked like by farmers.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLqQttJinjo

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by scott martins on March 11, 2010 at 4:49pm

This is guy is such a joke!!! I don't blame Dawkins for not debating him. I don't know if I could keep a straight face when the guy pulled out the crockaduck. I don't know if I would laugh or cry for his ignorance. I wonder if he came up with his crackpot ideas on his own or if someone is behind him pulling the strings?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Klaus Motan on March 12, 2010 at 12:20pm

...nevertheless you´ve to admit, the man seriously is inspired and devoted to his goals....:-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sonny Mobley on March 12, 2010 at 2:26pm

May all that he does be fruitless.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johnsky on March 12, 2010 at 5:46pm

Fruitless... oh man. I chuckled. Nice.

The banana argument is incredibly flawed.

Bananas aren't designed for us... if this was true, all other fruit would likely have followed the same logic. And I've had allot of incredibly frustrating fruit.
The basic logic they're missing is : We like the banana because our hands have evolved to manipulate phallic objects with ease. Bananas are phallic.

Imagine if our hands had evolved to handle only spherical objects. Bananas would really suck.


Arguing that the banana was designed after humans, for humans, is like claiming wood was designed after the hammer, for the hammer.
Must have had allot of useless hammers lying around.

• ▶ Reply