Bitcoin Forum
May 02, 2024, 11:22:41 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 21, 2020, 05:52:42 PM
By the way, there is a new book on Jim Simons, "The Man Who Solved the Market".
Simons actualy did did what Armstrong is saying he did.

"Simons built a computer model capable of digesting torrents of data and selecting ideal trades, a scientific and systematic approach partly aimed at removing emotion from the investment process.
Since 1988, Renaissance's signature Medallion fund has generated average annual returns of 66 percent. The firm has earned profits of more than $100 billion; Simons is worth twenty-three billion dollars."




...Compare this with Armstrong  Grin Grin Grin

Simons has a very good background in theoretical mathematics, and well known in this field. However his models work because of trail and error, and refinements. NOT some magical 8.6 number and pi.

He have wealth funds of billions. Pretty remarkable.
2  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 17, 2020, 06:10:02 PM
Well this market better tank down HARD next week or his entire reputation is on the line

so is this the thing now? So this can be disproven? Finally, someone made a deadline. Tangible. let us see!!! Cheesy
3  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 15, 2020, 02:53:15 PM
Marty just released a new private blog on 15/ January as we approach the ECM date. Anyone know what is the deal here. Another of his diffusive forecasts? Which is technically correct if you thrown in the "cycle inversion" terms.
4  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 09, 2020, 11:05:52 AM
Thanks Parisboy.

Currently I'm mostly interested what happens around January 18 ECM.
So far I have been long this market big time and where I would normally haved trimmed some around end of December I decided to see if we would rally into this date.
So far not much is happening but I'll wait and see. Gumbi has send me some information and numbers and I keep a close look at it.

If indeed a big top (for instance going towards 30K in DOW) is created around the ECM with a year long draw down then that is a nice call and I will trade it.
If nothing happens I myself close the book on MA and move on.  

he sent them to me also, and I am excited to see. I still dont' understand how the forecast can be proven wrong.
5  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 06, 2020, 03:06:41 PM
That's the trouble, you can't do many samples because those arrays aren't available via Socrates......I ran into the same issue back in 2016. Only way to get those are to wait for him to post them online in his blog or take them out of a report.  Find me more current ones and I'll be happy to run tests galore.

The Socrates arrays from the ask-socrates website were not working properly until September, but they are now working since about 3 month.
You can also see in the private blog posts that MA is recently posting only the new arrays and not the old arrays anymore (except the yearly arrays which are not available on ask-socrates.com)

did you make money of reversal trade. does it work, and are you a shill or not. please answer truthfully.
6  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 03, 2020, 07:32:07 PM

I guess there is no reason to ask yourself why is there NO REVIEWS AT ALL yet from people who bought the "fastest-selling book ever on Amazon", except the "reviews" which say "I can't believe I missed out on getting a copy.".



https://youtu.be/bqPARIKHbN8
lmaof, he is going for the yelp method.
7  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 30, 2019, 04:58:06 PM
See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog
No I have not read, will read it. 
8  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 30, 2019, 04:48:51 PM
This call for a correction in Jan 13th/18th 2020 IMO is irrelevant, the indices are so overbought I feel the weight on my shoulders, lol. Anyone who pays attention to markets can see a correction coming. Here's my prediction, the market corrects this week and/or first week in Jan.

 


 Cool

Why is it irrelevant, the model still forecasts the correction, it is not something Martin made the arrays, to conform to it.  I am still waiting for testing the model before I pay for his subscription, Gumbi should send me the numbers soon. I am noticed, will alter the settings, now.

Also I see, lot of people here regurgitate the same phrases, Martin is a charlatan, bla. bla.? What is going on here? We don't need that, explain in detail what you want to say.


I don't personally know why the Pi dates seem to be spot on. Maybe it is just a fluke but just from my experience. I have no explanation for 2001.695, especially the one in April 2010 pi date, and May in 2007, and  Goldman Sachs getting sued. So I thought if similar affairs repeat maybe the recent Pi date should conform to it, so I waited and watched for any news about Goldman. And we had yet again on the same day, 2018.895 Goldman Sachs getting sued again.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/goldman-sachs-going-down-on-the-pi-target/
Even though it may seem a minor incident, not having broader implications, it shows that there is some order in how affairs are arranged.

And I also need an explanation for the claims of Princeton accumulating transactions, a little over 1 trillion dollars, read it in FX street, this is not some random blog website.  So what is this about? Is this with trading transactions or some weird money laundering, scam going on? I am not going to follow Martin with blind faith. It is a possibility that Martin is a scammer and that he did, in fact, did the deed which leads him to 11 years of solitary confinement.


 




What do you want? If I had had the opportunity to view this site 10 years ago or so when I first read about Armstrong, when there were no critical sites like this one, then sure I would not have even looked at this crackpot.

Even this rather unstructured blog is loaded with facts that you can check. And yes, there is bla, bla as you say but that is opinion that you quote as credible. I am dealing only with facts not opinion.

Go and spend the time to read the facts and check them. I am here to help people like you and now you want to be spoon-fed?

Give me a break.

We are volunteers who aim to protect people like you and you are complaining.

The Wikipedia site is a good start. I can tell you it is not biased. Read the edit history of the Wikipedia article and you will see how many facts even were rejected because they do not meet the high quality standards. You have to have some patience. A charlatan like Armstrong is not an everyday occurrence - he spent decades to build up layers and layers of smokescreens. It takes time to unravel that. Have you read all 340 pages of this blog? Have you read all pages of armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com ?

Before you are complaining, DO challenge us. But not with bla-bla like you do. Quote one issue at the time. With links. That is the way to do it. Tell us where we are wrong. Otherwise you get what you deserve.

You are biased. You WANT to believe Armstrong and you are looking for confirmation. Perhaps you find another cult member who can do this for you. Ask Gumbi then. Did he not give you what you want?


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog


I am just saying it seems unauthentic, saying the same phrases. It seems mechanical and like a troll. And I am all for not believing Martin, that is what I want.
So could you do me a favor be a little more organic? 
9  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 30, 2019, 04:21:53 PM
I've been following MA since at least 2013 and I have to say there's both good and bad in doing so.  I know alot are calling him a fraud and I've also met a few people who claim to have made alot of money trading using his system too.  I was highly skeptical myself and studied it extensively for my own curiosity like many others.  First, I can confirm from other sources that the system that MA made available to everyone as Socrates and the one he uses for himself are completely different.  Many people are duped into believing this which is unfortunate.  I also was hoping to get access to his famous buy/sell charts like this he posts on the blog occasionally but again never gonna happen (also confirmed).  So basically if you think you are going to get access to the actual program he uses by buying a Socrates service, I would urge you to save your money.  

I had the full service for Socrates when it came out in 2016 and did alot of work to see if the arrays and reversals actually did what they say they would.  After back testing everything I found that the daily and weekly (to a lesser extent) stuff was pretty much worthless.  The monthly was somewhat more accurate and the yearly was better still (I'm talking about the arrays from his system that he sometimes posts on the blog, not the public Socrates membership stuff).  MA has also confirmed in the past that the larger time frames were much more reliable than the shorter terms because the smaller time frames had large amounts of noise on them (this makes alot of sense in the age of electronic trading).  In general the arrays are confusing to use and the Socrates version available to the public is worthless for trading IMHO.  On the blog MA makes tons of claims about being right all the time and that it's always his computer making the calls but often you'll see in his writing that's he's making some subjective suggestions about outcomes based on his own personal logic.  For instance one of the documents he wrote in 2008 said we'd likely see US states starting to go bankrupt in 2009.  We know now that none have but some are getting close so the idea was right but the timing was off.  Did the computer predict that? Not likely.  I remember one call specifically in late 2015 that the DOW would crash the next week.  Nobody called that at all except him and the computer nailed it (I did very well on that one).  The 2015 WEC he also told everyone to short Deutsche Bank since they were in terrible shape over in Europe, again nailed that one too (that short has worked really well even to this day).  Then later in early 2016 he said the US dollar would continue to rise and gold would drop below $1000 (possibly even to $800).  I remember realizing the bottom in the commodities was in, USD had peaked and that MA's comments were just flat wrong.  I suspect he was using trading logic that if you shake both the long and shorts hard than that sets up a potential rally later.  That incorrect commentary even kept going while gold was skyrocketing and the USD tanked.  I was pretty pissed having missed that nice little run so it was at that point that I realized I couldn't rely on his system/commentary to trade and that I needed to create my own system.  I have now developed my own system which took some elements from his design (some parts I stumbled upon accidentally and they often match up quite interestingly with his reversals and trend lines) while incorporating other items I designed that greatly increase my trading efficiency.  Now I use his system/commentary more like an early radar warning to watch for things on my own system and my trading has improved substantially.  

To me there's no question that this guy is super smart and has learned very good trading instincts but just like anyone he's human and will inject his personal bias at times even if he says it's the computer.  The key is to be able to use it as a reference rather than using it as gospel to trade or you will lose money.  His macro level views are exceptional and I've yet to see anyone else even get close to thinking out of the box like he can.

It seems like an unbiased review.
10  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 30, 2019, 03:55:34 PM
This call for a correction in Jan 13th/18th 2020 IMO is irrelevant, the indices are so overbought I feel the weight on my shoulders, lol. Anyone who pays attention to markets can see a correction coming. Here's my prediction, the market corrects this week and/or first week in Jan.

 


 Cool

Why is it irrelevant, the model still forecasts the correction, it is not something Martin made the arrays, to conform to it.  I am still waiting for testing the model before I pay for his subscription, Gumbi should send me the numbers soon. I am noticed, will alter the settings, now.

Also I see, lot of people here regurgitate the same phrases, Martin is a charlatan, bla. bla.? What is going on here? We don't need that, explain in detail what you want to say.


I don't personally know why the Pi dates seem to be spot on. Maybe it is just a fluke but just from my experience. I have no explanation for 2001.695, especially the one in April 2010 pi date, and May in 2007, and  Goldman Sachs getting sued. So I thought if similar affairs repeat maybe the recent Pi date should conform to it, so I waited and watched for any news about Goldman. And we had yet again on the same day, 2018.895 Goldman Sachs getting sued again.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/goldman-sachs-going-down-on-the-pi-target/
Even though it may seem a minor incident, not having broader implications, it shows that there is some order in how affairs are arranged.

And I also need an explanation for the claims of Princeton accumulating transactions, a little over 1 trillion dollars, read it in FX street, this is not some random blog website.  So what is this about? Is this with trading transactions or some weird money laundering, scam going on? I am not going to follow Martin with blind faith. It is a possibility that Martin is a scammer and that he did, in fact, did the deed which leads him to 11 years of solitary confinement.


 

11  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 08:36:38 PM
Look at the month of January, being the week of the 13th , max target is just above 30k on the Dow  Yes we do consider the 2019 weekly closings the market should exceed them in January.

I can send you more specific trade/confirmation signals if you need by PM but essentially the week of the 13th of Jan is showing up as a massive turning point in many markets so everything appears to point to a high which should be above any current levels we have seen this month.

Yeah, please can you do that, in my profile.
12  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 07:29:05 PM
So dow is at 28645 right now, so a high meaning what exactly? At what level should we look at, weekly, monthly or yearly? So if the price of dow closes around the same level as it is today, on the end week of the ECM, would that mean that it didnt elect the high so the requirement of shorting it would not be necessary, and the ECM would still be correct?

Problem is at what level do we define a highest weekly closing, I mean this is the first weekly closing in that year, 2020, do we also consider the year 2019 weekly closings?  

@trulycoinednonymousCoder
"The forecast is that it will either go up or it will go down"

That is a complete misunderstanding by AnonymousCoder as I said in a previous post quite clearly.

"There can be no excuse that is impossible. If we see a high in line with the ECM the market has to go down or the ECM will be proven to be completely false."


He also cannot answer to the monthly bearish in his disaster reversal post specifically the Dow not including the 21600 monthly bearish reversal.
Oh ok, I see. Sorry about that. So how can I right now see and identify a high on that week if it occurs to evaluate what you say is correct. On that week of 2020.05, guess it is the 13'th January from that week to the end, from that ECM date, 0.05 x 365.



Yes exactly the week of the 13th, so the close of the 17th Jan will most likely produce the highest weekly closing with a drop thereafter.
13  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 07:08:17 PM
@trulycoinednonymousCoder
"The forecast is that it will either go up or it will go down"

That is a complete misunderstanding by AnonymousCoder as I said in a previous post quite clearly.

"There can be no excuse that is impossible. If we see a high in line with the ECM the market has to go down or the ECM will be proven to be completely false."


He also cannot answer to the monthly bearish in his disaster reversal post specifically the Dow not including the 21600 monthly bearish reversal.
Oh ok, I see. Sorry about that. So how can I right now see and identify a high on that week if it occurs to evaluate what you say is correct. On that week of 2020.05, guess it is the 13'th January from that week to the end, from that ECM date, 0.05 x 365.

As you can see I am very open to this ECM model, because of what happened in the last 21. November, Pi date with Goldman Sachs, was just mindblowing, the same affair happened in the 2007 target, which Martin pointed out. Seems that even minute affairs follow ECM cycles. And the 1998.55 +3.141 target was also quite crazy.
I just want to know whether the reversals really are true. Or those instances especially with 2015.75, was just pure luck. I don't know. Green on this.
14  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 06:05:28 PM
Ok, that actually makes sense.



A turning point meaning a high/low on an intraday or closing basis, in this case for the week of the 13th. The market will need to rise above the turning point after the week of the 13th of Jan intraday and also close higher on a weekly closing basis in order to infer the statement is wrong.

There are only two possibilities since the week of the 13th Jan is showing up as a major turning point, a high on an intraday or weekly closing basis the week of the 13th means a drop into 2021, a low means we get another cycle inversion.


Ok, thanks will wait then :I

The forecast is that it will either go up or it will go down. Here is the commercial (Socrates $$$ per month subscription paid for version) prime example:

A Self-fulfilling Financial Forecast

In other words: Pure bullshit. Sadly there are in fact people who buy this.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog
15  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 05:43:34 PM

A turning point meaning a high/low on an intraday or closing basis, in this case for the week of the 13th. The market will need to rise above the turning point after the week of the 13th of Jan intraday and also close higher on a weekly closing basis in order to infer the statement is wrong.

There are only two possibilities since the week of the 13th Jan is showing up as a major turning point, a high on an intraday or weekly closing basis the week of the 13th means a drop into 2021, a low means we get another cycle inversion.


Ok, thanks will wait then :I
16  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 03:16:50 PM

@s29
The forecast has not changed with the the price target being around the 30 000 area on the Dow. but I suggest you subscribe to the pro version if you actually want more specific trade information by Armstrong. It is extremely unfair to post information posted on his private blog when people are paying their hard earned money for the same information but essentially the S&P 500 and Nasdaq on the weekly level is now showing a major turning point the week of the 13th of January 2020 exactly in line with the ECM(2020.05) We should then see a move to the downside thereafter into at least 2021. Armstrong calls for a 20% or more correction.

If this happens AnonymousCoder and others will be silenced for good and believe me I will be shorting the hell out of this market the week of the 13th of Jan 2020 which should produce a high on a intraday or closing basis on the weekly level.


So what if it doesn't happen, what is the excuse then?  The model forecast a major turning point, what do you define as a turning point? What if in later months it rises above that point? How can we infer that this statement is wrong. It all seems wish-washy with no clear target or concise statement. What do you exactly mean. Others are welcome to write.
17  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 01:06:51 PM
However, to give credit to the ECM model, the fact that 2001.695 date was on point, and that Goldman Sachs was getting sued on Pi dates, freaking twice, was hair raising. So I began to see what other theories, researchers, serious ones, in the field of mathematics, come to similar conclusions as Martin.

There is the classical innovation wave cycle of around 54-50 years, from the Kondratiev wave cycle. Which may have inspired Martin to look broadly over the decades. Then there is recent research involved with socio-dynamical theory, explaining the fall and rise of empires. Peter Turchin, a mathematician, explains dynamically, with his equations (there are real differential equations involved) that there are 50-year cycles (close to Martins 8.6 x 6 year) in civil revolts, and debt repayment cycles. And that the next one should line up in early 2020/21  

He also suggests that there are 300-year levels in power, and population rises and falls. Which is very close to 309.6 years (8.6 x 36) Martin suggests 2032, completion of the 309-year cycle. If the powers that be comply and conform a decade before, the change in 2032 is not as dramatic and a slow change in transfer of power. Which makes sense liking the allegory, of removing a lid of a pot of boiling water, before it explodes.

Peter Turchin has a working model and tested it in pass data, where this data was not actually trained with the model but tested on. He also is very hopeful that his model does not work in 2021 because if true there will be major bloodshed on the streets, because of economic turmoil. I see no reason why he should fudge his research, and this field in physics/mathematics is valid. I think we behave as heard of animals in times of panic, and very predictable because we postpone issues until it culminates in a disaster. This enduring time has a limit, that is extractable with the data we have, and roughly corresponds to the 50 year level of debt repayments.  
18  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 29, 2019, 12:49:33 PM
Just joined bitcoin talk, to actually see what the hell is the fuss about Martin. So I have been following you. You seem to contradict yourself. And maybe it is because we don't fully understand or you are not explaining clearly why a yearly reversal election, cancels a monthly reversal election?

And to the rest of people lurking here. Is there anyone besides Gumbi, that actually trades with reversal system and are hundred percent confident that it works?


Thanks
Pages: [1]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!