This highlights a key flaw in the skeptic’s reasoning. By testing for one trick at a time, he missed the possibility that Debbie could’ve been switching between them to achieve her effect. For example, she could’ve used sleight of hand when he tested for a trick deck, and so on.

As long as videotaping can detect sleight of hand, it doesn’t matter if there are also other ways to detect it.

The skeptic doesn’t over look this; in fact, he tests for both of these tricks. If Debbie requires both sleight of hand and a trick deck, she would’ve failed both of the first two trials.

The skeptic doesn’t conclude that Debbie doesn’t use any trick to achieve her affect, only that she doesn't use sleight of hand, a trick deck, or a planted “volunteer.” Even if she does use some other trick, it wouldn’t affect his conclusion.

This is irrelevant because the skeptic never claims that her success was due to coincidence. He just claims that it wasn’t due to any of the three tricks that he tested her for.