Spoon bending boy in 1976

There are many methods used by magicians to produce an effect of spoon bending. Some of those methods involve holding an already bent spoon in such a way that it does not appear bent and some of those allow the bend to be revealed in such a way as it looks to the spectator as if the spoon is bending "by itself." A spoon taken from a pile of hotel flatware -- probably all of identical, or at most a few different designs -- does not provide much protection against a magician having an already bent spoon available.

Anyone conversant with prestidigitation knows that accounts by observers untrained in the art cannot be relied on (there is a limit, for that matter, how much the testimony of trained observers can be relied on). People will firmly believe, for example, that their eyes never left some object when that simply is not true.

That means that we, as second-hand observers, cannot logically take this story as presented as very strong evidence for actual paranormal activity.

To conclude, however, that because the story does not provide evidence of a paranormal event that one knows what took place is much more illogical and irrational as to take the event at face value. We weren't there, there is nothing in the events recounted to provide clear evidence of fraud (no "Oh look! Halley's Comet!" in the story ), to provide evidence one way or another. Ones prior belief that all such incidents are fakes is just that -- a prior belief and no comment on the specifics of this incident at all.

Despite certain entertainers who have made being obnoxious about things they disagree with part of their act, being rude and unpleasant doesn't mean you are smart or more intelligent or less gullible than those one is being rude to. It just means you are acting like a jerk. (It is pretty easy, by the way, to fool self-proclaimed Skeptics with magic tricks -- like anyone else, you just play to their assumptions).

And I do not think, by the way, that the story not looking like a nice clean piece of fiction with all the normal inconsistencies written out is any kind of a proof that it is a fabrication (i.e., a piece of fiction). Anyone who has spent any time at all with eye-witness testimony will find this account completely believable as an account of what the teller remembers of what took place. Real testimony contains inconsistencies. Its only when a story has become so polished in retelling that the original story is lost that the inconsistencies are polished out. That doesn't mean that this isn't a made-up story, it just means that small inconsistencies doesn't mean that it is, and, in fact, that they make it more likely that this is what the person actually remembers happening.

It's possible.

Of course, we have equal evidence to suppose that you yourself are "David" and are, in reality, a Mafia hit-man who is trying to lure your victim out of hiding so as to earn the money you need to purchase your next sex-slave from Asia to support your compulsive necrophilia. Since you judge the one hypothesis as "probable" we must therefore also conclude that it is probable that you are a murderer for hire and sexual gratification.