I watched the whole Phenomenon performance (including the Chris Angel / Jim Callahan confrontation).
Once again, I am struck by a sense of the participant missing the obvious.
It seems to me that if you don't like Chris Angel, or think he's some flavor of bigot (or all-around jerk), the best way to crush him would be to accept his challenge and pass.
I mean, if you're actually able to talk to a dead guy who can see into enclosed boxes and/or envelopes, then why not just say to Chris: "Okay. You're on. Hang onto your envelope and let me get my salt circle repaired." If the process of being "invested" by the dead guy is so physically taxing that you can only handle it once per day, why not just say to Chris: "Okay. You're on. I need a day to recover from the physical stress of dealing with my dead guy. Hang on to your envelope and I'll meet you again here tomorrow."
Just do it, and the critic is silenced much more effectively than by you acting like you are in a druken rage (and becoming physically violent, to boot).
In regards to a test, I think that it would be best to have a better randomizer in place than a person's preferences. I don't think that the 1 out of 100 object-pool-option used in Phenomenon was a bad idea, but I would want to make sure that the protocol controls for access to the pool (especially after the object was chosen).
However, trying to come up with a protocol is not going to be very productive given Jim's cryptic remarks, when what's needed is a clear list of the types of things that Mr. Hill is and isn't capable of doing.