I'm simply bumping this thread because the OP mentioned James Randi. Really, I don't see why everybody gives him all the attention that he doesn't deserve.
Firstly, there has been enough evidence on the interwebs which shows that Randi is not as honest as he wishes us to believe. I provide two such links right here:
PsiPog.net : Beware Pseudo-Skepticism by Peebrain Skeptical Investigations - Investigating Skeptics - Media Skeptics - Randi's dishonest claims about dogs
Frankly I don't find it all that surprising considering how Randi and his loyal platoon love to look down upon people who believe in supernatural phenomena or are religious in general. Such people are, stupid and are inferior (according to them). Do you really think such fanatics are capable of conducting such a truly neutral and objective test regarding psychic phenomena or otherwise? I don't and hopefully my viewpoint makes sense to the third person.