Do we believe in Machina Dynamics?

Hmm,i actually know a guy who lined the insides of all his caps and hats with aluminum foil.Every time i start probing him on Mach.Dyn. affiliation,he changes the subject and leaves immediately.

No, but what I really don't believe is that we need yet another thread (probably destined to be deleted anyway) on why we don't believe in this..

I recently bid on a Clever Little Clock, not so much because I wanted to try it but rather to see if a legitimate bid from someone not associated with the seller would win. My bid was too low as it went for $141.
Why? I'm skeptical that real people are bidding on this clock.

This topic has, of course, been beaten nearly to death... but i can't resist.

The question raised in this thread -- do we "believe" in machina dynamica -- is perfectly stated. For at its root, the Machina Dynamic question is, as the question suggests,
a question of "belief." As such, the Machina Dynamica debate is a near perfect analog to the basic questions of religious belief; it forces us to confront the most fundamental questions of the human condition: the irreconcilable division between reason and faith.

In one camp we have the secular audiophiles. They apply reason and a scientific method to the evaluation of Machina Dynamic products. The secularists demand measurable, repeatable, and explainable evidence that a tiny little clock can produce an audible difference. Because no such evidence exists -- and even Machina Dynamica makes no attempt to suggest it does -- these secularists reject little clocks and pretty rocks as no more than a scam.

In the other camp, we have the believers. They need no "proof" as to why a blue CD cover creates extended bass response; it is sufficient for them that they believe it does. And by having faith that these products work, they actually "do" for the believers. Of course, many believers try to convert the heathen secularists by cloaking their support for Machina Dynamica products with scientific sounding explanations -- "outlet cover materials have different vibrational properties" -- but these explanations are as hollow and transparent as Intelligent Design. Reading the posts of these crusaders, one strains to accept that they even believe their own BS.

So, the debate over Machina Dynamica rages on. It is no more likely that we will develop a consensus on whether little pebbles add a sense of upper range air, as it is that we will agree on whether Jesus was the son of God or a just a humble carpenter. We can't reach this consensus because some of us appeal to reason for the answer, while others merely "believe." The bottom line is that both sides are "right" according to their own terms.