Quote Originally Posted by Rainman View Post
Oh. Well I guess that's good I suppose. I guess I figured people would consider this paranormal. Which of course leads to the question, how can you explain someone creating and controlling the flow of an electrical current with just their body? And if he really did do it, then it would be possible to set something on fire because of the heat.
The thing is: "skeptics" (emphasis on the quotations) will never find the possibility in someone actually doing something 'paranormal', unless it's tested a million times or more (and then, many of them will still default on the assumption that there is "still some unknown, physical explanation that they just haven't found yet). There is absolutely nothing you can show them, in any one (or two or seven or fourty-five) clips that will convince them that there is even a chance that anything shown in a video is authentic, because it's possible to explain away anything on film as a trick, and they will always take that route because, in a situation where it's impossible to prove something either way (like watching a video) many figure that it's better to assume on the side of the "scientifically accepted" position, such as the guy in the youtube comment that goes so far as to tell (assume) exactly which chemicals the guy used to make the fire.

While no one with half a brain can dismiss the explanations (read as: assumptions) of how the tricks were done, I find it a fallacy - and not the least bit scientific - to immediately conclude that something is bogus without having nothing more than a video to go on (just as much as I find it a fallacy to believe that such a thing is authentic, without having nothing more than a video to go on).