Wait a second... Wasn't this thread originally about why bananas would send atheists fleeing, like garlic for the proverbial vampire?
Pshaw. I eat bananas like that for breakfast*.
I think we got off-topic with the observation that bananas (as with most of the plants and animals we eat on a regular basis) are perhaps among the worst examples to use in the Creationist debate as they are the result of what could be termed artificial (as opposed to natural) selection - they were cultivated to emphasize certain desirable qualities.
The general approach that the video uses - reasoning backward from form to utility - is one that is used among biologists as well, but one has to be very aware of the propensity to build elaborate castles on foundations of sand. This falls into the category of what Gould called "Just So Stories," likening them to Kipling's stories explaining how the leopard got its spots, for example. It's easy enough to see a particular form or behavior and construct a theory as to how it might help the organism survive and reproduce, but in doing so we have to be aware of the fact that we're creating a hypothesis based around a sometimes incomplete idea of the origin and possible historic uses of the given feature. This is one area, for example, in which many evolutionary psychologists seem to take a fair number of liberties, to the detriment of their science.
The Creationist/evolutionary debate is better addressed, I think, by observing things like flower coloration. The evolutionist would like to be able to demonstrate some utility in flowers having brilliant colors. By observing the eyes of the pollinators that the plant is interested in attracting (from the natural selection model, plants that are successful in out-competing rivals for pollination services are going to tend to survive over time), we find out that the do, in fact, see colors (albeit in a slightly different spectrum from than humans).
* That was the first time I can recall ever having used that statement in a way that could be both figuratively and literally true.