"the person who deserves the million dollars is the one who can prove that the sum total of human perceptual experience is as limited as their own."

If anyone made that claim it would be up to them to prove it.

I don't know anyone who makes that claim though. Do you?

"Same old, same old."

Interesting story, but none of it constitutes evidence.

Your experiences could be real, or they could just be real to you (or for all we know you could be lying through your teeth). Without any evidence though anyone you talk to (and science) can't know for sure.

That's the basis of the challenge. With all these claims and proof of the paranormal, bring forward the evidence. Put up or shut up. Sadly no one has.

"The Amazing Randi set up his "challenge" so it couldn't be won."

Sorry one more thing, this is also silly because the challenge is an agreement between Randi and the person applying; the protocol and the success conditions are agreed to by both parties up front, and the result has to be self evident (i.e. not something subjective). It's also a legally binding contract, so no it's not setup so it can't be won.

"The Amazing Randi set up his "challenge" so it couldn't be won. Oddly enough, paranormal activity doesn't happen on command within the parameters he set. So, the whole thing was a crock anyway."

So because some paranormal activity doesn't fall within the rules set up by the challenge, the entire challenge is a crock? Nice logic.. My dishwasher doesn't wash every every dish in existence (some are too big), so it's a crock...

It only makes sense to risk a large sum of money on something that is reproducible (an ability or something). Something like ghosts (unless it's a ghost that appears on command) just don't fit well with the challenge. Big deal, so what?

"As someone who has seen the same ghost on two different occasions..."

Again so what? There's a reason anecdotal evidence isn't very strong. You are human, your brain isn't a reliable record of events, your memory is malleable, etc..

"For some people, there is no amount of evidence that will convince them."

Not true in Randi's case, if actual evidence was presented he, like most skeptics, would gladly change their position. Science throughout history has a proven record of changing based on evidence.

Again, just because some aspect of the paranormal doesn't fall well under the challenge doesn't mean the challenge is faulty, it just means it doesn't cover every aspect of the paranormal (and it wasn't intended to).

On topic, while I'm sad to see it go, it's obvious that it really didn't create the controversy around the big name woo-makers that was desired, and they ended up spending all their time with people who really didn't do anything to help decrease magical thinking.

The people who either know they are just scamming everyone or are just self deluded but know that they risk a good thing by taking the MDC aren't going to, so the only ones that will are the people with nothing to lose.