This paper is another argument in favor of a uniformitarian approach to Creole languages, analyzed on a par with non-Creole languages. We take a critical look at competing hypotheses about the formation of Creole languages and any resulting typology. We document and analyze the shortcomings of these hypotheses in terms of methodical and theoretical flaws, lack of empirical coverage, and socio-historical implausibility. Then, we present our own proposal for a “Null Theory of Creole Formation” whereby the term “Creole” can only have socio-historical, and definitely not linguistic-structural, significance. In this “Null Theory,” the individual-level cognitive processes that underlie the formation of grammatical structures in Creole languages (via the acquisition of both native and non-native languages, by children and adults, respectively) are exactly on a par with their counterparts in the formation of non-Creole languages. So there isn’t, and couldn’t be, any sui generis “Creole typology.” We conclude with some guidelines toward a fully uniformitarian and theoretically constructive framework for the study of Creole languages and their formation – a framework that can also help us understand the formation of new language varieties that do not go by the label “Creole.”