I don't see what's the big deal here - if you believe that acupuncture and acupressure are reall and effective, why not accept that the same system can be used in a destructive way? Now, it may or may not be applicable in a real fight situation but that's a different story.
Someone said that the meridians don't corelate to nerves, therefore it's not scientific, therefore it does'nt exist. Faulty logic.
Things don't need scientific approval to exist. Science attempts to explain the observed universe, it formulates
theories - ideas that explain how somethings
might work. It get's close, it not there yet.
Plus, the whole scientific attitude is one way to look at things. Just one of a number of legitimate reference-frames for dealing with what's going on here.
The question is which outlook is more benficial to you in a certain field.
It's just
different terms!
EXAMPLE - I might say (since I'm a qi-gong nut-case) that I cured a headache I suffered from with a little qi boost.
A medical doctor might say it's actually
placebo. what is placebo? it's the medical term for
the body's natural healing powers. (don't take my word on it, check).
But the "scientific" lay-man wo'nt recognize the fact nothing has been explained. (some postulate that the placebo effect is caused by different hormons released into the blood-stream, but again, cannot explain the
how).
Science does not understand how the chemo-electric interactions in our brains create awarness. Science can present pretty good models in many different areas (an illusion, according to a different attitude), but they are mostly concerned with the the
WHAT and not actually with the
HOW.
Wow, what a rant! Sorry...

.
One last point - Science does'nt claim to know everything.
To be a hardcore skeptic is NOT to be scientific in one's approach.
Peace.