Sure, as I understand it, and what I think Comfort is doing, is imitating in a humorous way... a point of view. Not being so serious - doing a spoof.
A spoof of what many atheist see/ believe Comfort (or other Christians) try to do when trying to explain how God does it, using the banana example.
Dorkins didn't know about Comforts previous vids or context from 1994 onwards and unfortunately has made an error whereby other atheists jumped too hastily on board.
This is why atheists will wonder "is this a Poe?" when a creationist argues his points. Because sometimes it's hard to tell "is the person really THAT stupid or are they pretending to be that stupid?" So if it's true that Comfort chose the banana in a kidding-around spirit, then he deliberately made himself look stupid. And that's pretty stupid.
"Get the atheist" is a very stupid game to play because it backfires, making theists look stupid(er). A joke needs to be clearly noted to be a joke - else persons who treat it seriously are right to do so.
What's the misperception he wanted to parody? I ask because I have not watched the vids you refer to. Is it that a watch or other human-designed object that's used in an Analogy to Design argument, isn't meant to be very exactly similar to god-designed nature? That atheists get into too many details and he doesn't think they're necessary?