I'm like you in that I feel it is fairly easy for "fake psychics" to fool people wanting to believe. But unfortunately I think people like The Amazing Randi and CSICOP tend to lump that stuff together with the legitiment question of if our conscousness can exist outside of our physical bodies.
Have a look at this:
Pam Reynolds underwent a radical form of brain surgery in which she met all the clinical definitions of death. Yet she left her body and observed the operation during this time, enabiling her to recount in detail what was said and done during the time she was supposedly "dead".
The case is significant in that she was extensively monitored durning the entire time and was, by all current medical definitions, dead.
So this case leaves us with two explainations - either our current medical definition of death is flawed or our conscousness can, at least for a limited time, exist without our body.
And there are other cases like that - particularly with very young children who've undergone near death experiences and reported visions very similar to what adults report. Again, this is significant because these children are too young to have been conditioned by society as to what to see when you die.
The scientific method has given us so much, and is essentially the foundation of western philosophy. And because of that, it is hard for us as westerners to remember that the scientific method is just a branch of philosophy. And that by its nature is not designed to answer questions that cannot be reduced to objective parts.
There is something going on that demands further investigation.