"SCIENTIFIC" SKEPTIC ???! 

He never went to college, so why this article calls him a scientific skeptic ? May be some people of his skeptic team are real scientifics, they sure got graded from some college, but this "debunker" never went to any college ! so how can wikipedia call him a "scientific"? Do you know at least if he uses a scientific method for whatever he tries to debunk ?
People, he didn't finished high school !!!

http://www.sptimes.com/Floridian/41498/The__quack__hunter.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.230.5   

You can't even write proper English. What college did you go to?  What's up, Doc? 
Thanks for the link, though. That's a great article on the amazing one.   

 I think scientific skepticism is related to following the scientific method, not formal education h2g2bob (talk) 
For sure. The user 82.224.230.5 would likely know that. It's just trolling behavior.  What's up, Doc? 

I'm not english and I rather be trolling right now than being a 12/13 years old wikipedia non-life geek (you know what I'm talkng about)!
Oh, we know what you're talking about, all right. Trust me.   
His IP is French, so, yeah, I won't hold his English skills against him. His personality, and his intellectual abilities, however, are things that I will hold against him. 
Back on topic, though, it is a common mistake that people make. People fail to understand that finding out the cause of flummery is a field in and of itself. Knowing when you need to enlist the help of an expert, and knowing what the expert is actually able to do, instead of assuming that 'expert ~= god' - that is a skill that many people lack. I suspect that Randi knows more about most scientific fields than many experts know about scientific fields outside their expertise.   

So according to you, it's enough to only "suspect" his scientifc knowledge to make disappear any kind of information related to his educational background ?!  I mean, is this the way wikipedia works ? you "suspect", how sure is that?! why didn't you even "wonder", that would have been a better reason for making disappear my contribution about his educational career don't you think ?!
I can't believe guys like you run wikipedia like kings of the info.. simply pitious.—Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 
I guess we should leave the 'no high-school' line in there.  It has nothing to do with 'scietific' vs 'non-scientific'.   His methods are unquestionably scientific, which of course explains why so few high profile psychics and fakers apply for the million dollar challenge.    
I added it back in with a bit of useful context, and minus the inferred line about never having been to college, which is not supported by the given source.   

 Works for me.  I'm guessing if he can teach college without a high-school degree, he could have attended college as well.  -)    

The IP again demonstrates that he's either a troll or an idiot, or both.  What's up, Doc?