Bitcoin Forum
January 29, 2020, 03:33:26 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 »
1  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: Today at 09:28:22 AM
IMO he is only a follower of the leading technical analysis theories.

Hey, thanks for your input. 
I had similar thoughts recently: 


Remember that he claims his computer processes inputs on a multi-dimensional plane that is beyond human capability, and at the same time he posts 2D charts for you to read them to back up his predictions. 


But I've not went so far to compare his charts and predictions with leading analysts.
2  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 27, 2020, 09:08:47 AM
An excerpt from MA his 2014 Cycles of War Report (2014!!!)

https://i.imgur.com/Zp6otO2.png

ECM 2020.05...

Ooh but wait... you bunch of circle jerkers here can argue now that the news reports came out in 2020 and that he was wrong.

Today's latest blog is saying that the next chance of a pandemic will be 2022.....the goal posts keep on moving!  He can never be wrong that way....if nothing happens in 2022, it will be 2024.  Its just a guessing game at the end of the day.

So, even Martin himself forgot about the document that that Looneyexpress quoted? Cheesy


As I said
 
Oh, "circle jerkers" could also argue that MA scattershot multiple dates for same prediction in other blogs/reports. Who knows.



What MA is doing is to scatter forecasts like a shotgun. Then in hindsight he creates a sales campaign around the one out of many that succeeded while ignoring the failed ones.

That's it. Yet some cult members will dig out what even Marty can't.
3  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 24, 2020, 07:07:06 PM
An excerpt from MA his 2014 Cycles of War Report (2014!!!)

https://i.imgur.com/Zp6otO2.png

ECM 2020.05...

Ooh but wait... you bunch of circle jerkers here can argue now that the news reports came out in 2020 and that he was wrong.

Hey ummm, SMIII? Thanks for your input.

Here is how "circle jerking" works:  
1) Provide clear quote of MA predicting a certain event and the timing of the said event if MA provided it (I guess you provided quote of him predicting... some thing that would happen around 2019).
2) Point out which event happened and you think MA predicted.

So with regards to 2), can you point out what exactly do you think he predicted? Which current (we are around that time-frame I guess) event?  Then we will refer back to the MA quote from 1) and see if MA nailed it.
I don't see anything irrational here, users here have done the same thing when refuting MAs predictions.  

I guess the "circle jerkers" can argue that MA hasn't really predicted anything... YET, tho the date and current events might be compelling.  
Oh, "circle jerkers" could also argue that MA scattershot multiple dates for same prediction in other blogs/reports. Who knows. But ok I guess let's not go into that for now.
4  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 23, 2020, 07:45:37 AM
COMMENT #1: HILARIOUS!! A simple FOOL wanting to shoot the messenger.
“A closed mind gathers NO facts.”

Marty, we gathered facts exposing your deception. It's all documented, and quoted.

REPLY: No worries. I find these people just a joke myself. I refrain from publishing them because sometimes they are just so off the wall it is hilarious. They claim I make up the questions because I publish ones that are at least valid. So once in a while I will post some of these crazy ones just to show how nuts they can be.

It's actually because questions have been generic.
How about you actually quote our posts and link to them?  
Tell us what we got wrong. Be specific.

5  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 22, 2020, 11:15:27 PM

Now that's a shocker.

Watson, you dumbass...
6  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 20, 2020, 12:51:25 PM
By the way, there is a new book on Jim Simons, "The Man Who Solved the Market".

https://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Solved-Market-Revolution/dp/073521798X
November 5, 2019
$20
384 pages
Is best seller
300+ reviews

https://www.amazon.com/Manipulating-World-Economy-Martin-Armstrong/dp/0578611171
~ December 25, 2019
~ 460 pages
~ $100, author claims it's a "public service"
Is not best seller, author claims it is
0 legit reviews
7  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 20, 2020, 07:23:29 AM
Armstrong just seems to be shooting predictions at random with big words and nice charts, and then hopes that some of them will stick.

Remember that he claims his computer processes inputs on a multi-dimensional plane that is beyond human capability, and at the same time he posts 2D charts for you to read them to back up his predictions. 
8  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 13, 2020, 09:58:51 AM
If in fact he could do that, based on his so called predictions, then he would not need to struggle to sell his over-priced books, overpriced reports, overpriced dysfunctional Socrates, overpriced conferences. He would just trade something like Natural Gas.

[...]

All he can do is to prey on even bigger losers, the members of his cult.

What a great business!
 

He can explain anything, lol.


The Revenge of Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; What is the catch? Why do you do everything you do with no charge. What is the hook? Nobody does something for nothing.

ANSWER: I get that question often. First I am paying back all the support everyone has shown to me and my family. Secondly; It is my greatest revenge against the evil power in banks of New York, the mainstream press, CFTC, and SEC all conniving against the public for the benefit of maintaining their power.

[...]

Yes, there has to be a cost for the Socrates Project because I am not going to be around forever. If you want that to continue, then people who are there to maintain the clients have to earn a living. We keep the prices modest for the general public to have access. That was my pledge. Of course, portfolio and global correlations models are for the institutions who have different sets of problems.

9  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 11, 2020, 09:26:35 AM
-snip-

So umm. Another weird video post:  

Robot Restaurants Are Very Popular in Asia

Categories: Technology
Tags: Creative Destruction, video

"Creative Destruction"? What in the world?  

Also, video publishing date is Dec 31, 2014.
What the heck does it tell us about current popularity of such restaurants? What is he trying to imply here?

Here is some not-Asia more recent video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3sQxILrcsY
Seems cool, but not really efficient tbh.

Is Marty fearmongering again? Better I buy his $500 reports to save myself from robot invasion!
10  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 06, 2020, 01:34:48 AM
And for Armstrong saying "Apparently this has been the fastest selling book ever on Amazon" https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/products/manipulating-the-world-economy-coming-third-edition/

doesn't anyone think it's strange for the fastest selling book on Amazon to have only 11 reviews?

We noticed, and lol'd:  

[...]
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.".

But hey maybe it has just not been delivered yet? Lol.
11  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 04, 2020, 11:44:44 AM
I hope Marty realizes his latest post features CGI.

Robot Soldiers

Categories: War
Tags: Cycle of War, video
12  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 03, 2020, 11:17:02 PM
We are lucky that he is sharing some of his knowledge publicly

As I already said, that just makes him a content curator.


What is even more ironic, you think that someone believes your spewing of bs and hatred.

I quoted everything. People can read Smiley  There is no need to "believe" like you "believe" in omniscient Socrates.
Yet you guys are trying to discredit direct black-and-white quotes, lol.

Again, if there is something specific you want to refute, you are welcome to do it and be coherent. Stop polluting thread with nonsense.


Let's recap:  

I proved Marty was wrong about gold for years:  

https://busy.org/@traxo/martin-armstrong-gold-bear

I explained how he has workarounds so that he's most of the time not-even-wrong:  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53486329#msg53486329

I proved that he was wrong about 2016 USA presidental elections, yet he brainwashed you into thinking he was correct:  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53486641#msg53486641

I quoted what Martin claimed Socrates computer is, and asserted that whoever believes in that nonsense is his cult member:  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53471994#msg53471994
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53477479#msg53477479
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53479047#msg53479047

And explained his deception about his computer providing 100% accurate predictions:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53508888#msg53508888

Then I joked about his Amazon book sell-out, but it's possible that I'm underestimating the size of his cult:  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53511446#msg53511446

I provided quotes for each of my claims. Anyone is welcome to refute it if they can.
13  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 03, 2020, 04:07:33 PM
It appears that Martin Armstrong indeed set a new record for the Amazon best seller

We have received a number of requests for press interviews since this book seems to be the fastest-selling book ever on Amazon since it sold out in less than three hours.


Interviewer:  
  -Your majesty, oh great one, please tell us, how did you do it?

Martin Armstrong:
  - Well you know, it all started with...


Behind the Scam: What Does It Take to Be a ‘Best-Selling Author’? $3 and 5 Minutes.

A while ago, I put up a fake book on Amazon. I took a photo of my foot, uploaded it as a book to Amazon, and in a matter of hours had achieved “№1 Best Seller” status, complete with the orange banner and everything.

How many copies did I need to sell to be able to call up my mother and celebrate my newfound authorial achievements? Three. Yes, a total of three copies to become a best-selling author. And I bought two of those copies myself!


The reason people aspire to call themselves “best-selling author” is because it dramatically increases your credibility and “personal brand.”


Quote
Step 1: Writing my book (~2 seconds)

Checked:  
In the interview at the beginning Martin Armstrong says  this $100 book is a work of a lifetime and it took him four weeks to write it when he was away from home in Asia.  Huh

In 2014 he wrote: I have three teams working right now on three of the four books I am trying to complete.

So what is anyone expecting? Listen to the interview HOW he answers questions. He is lying about everything as always. He can't even talk normally. His excuse for this nonsense is that he is a "prolific writer".

Note Martin also possibly accidentally admitted to buying the book himself:  

What we have determined is that there were many people who purchased several copies to hand out as gifts. One client said he bought five copies and sent them to politicians he knew.

And his cult member or paid shill who comes to tell us about it:  

I've figured the book will sell out, so I was checking regularly. And as soon as it was available, I did order, two copies, one for myself, and other as a gift (to be backup copy as well).

I'll buy mostly whatever writing Armstrong has to sell on the matter of economy and finance, below 100$. And for this book I was ready to pay even more.

March 22, 2016

But this guy just doesn't stop to amaze me. I was following Socrates on irregular level, since I didn't understand much in the beginning. But in the same time, as time was allowing, I started to educate myself on the actual modelling that MA is doing. And it's not a trivial thing to understand. Lately I started to have a grasp of what MA is actually doing with his modelling, and I can start to imagine the amount of work that MA has put into it. And from my point of view, it's monumental.
December 25, 2019
No comment on Socrates, no experience with it.
Shocked Huh



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.".

14  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 03, 2020, 11:00:54 AM
He and Socrates are not perfect.  No one can be.

Thing is that he often implies (or even flat out claims) that his computer's predictions can't possibly be wrong, thus deceiving readers.
For example:  

I greatly appreciate the confidence saying I am newer wrong. But on an individual level, NOBODY can possibly be right all the time. This is why I try to emphasize that the numbers are the numbers and that all we can do is watch how everything unfolds. I have no personal vision of the future and what I fear I would not say publicly anyway for that is just opinion.  
All I can do is say this is what has happened in the past and express what the computer says – not ME. The markets are the only infallible guide if you just listen..

It is NOT that I am never wrong. Personally, that is just not possible. I try to qualify what I “think” from the model.

If we get signals in all, it is hard to be wrong for this is NOT my personal OPINION. You can see the future unfold in slow-motion.

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, Have you ever been wrong?

ANSWER: On a personal level, of course.

[...]

If I was personally infallible, then why build a computer?



Posted Jan 26, 2013 by Martin Armstrong

But our computer has been forecasting politics for the last 30 years and it has never been wrong yet in any country.

He also implies that he can predict long-term with 100% accuracy, which actually then makes it "perfect" prediction machine for some events and time-spans:  

The Long-Term is far easier to predict with even 100% accuracy than Short-Term.

So if he acknowledges that he's not always correct, how come he NEVER admitted when his computer was wrong? Or perhaps I missed such confession?  
Did he ever come out and said Well guys, this is one time in 30 years that computer's forecast was wrong. I don't think he has.
In fact when he's wrong, he just brainwashes you into thinking he was right, see for example his 2016 elections "long-term" "prediction":  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53486641#msg53486641
15  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 03, 2020, 07:20:58 AM
The Armstrong bashers here [...]
[...] You are not credible.  

Piss off, doofus.  
Everything we said here was backed up with direct, black-and-white quotes from Martin Armstrong.  
If there is something specific you want to refute, be coherent. Stop polluting thread with nonsense (ditto other cult members shills here).



I will bet you all of the bashers here read his blog regularly and gain good information and have profited from it.  You may have the time to do god knows how many hours of research to come up with similar resources and facts - but would you know where to look or reach a similar conclusion without reviewing his writings or forecasts ?

That makes him CONTENT CURATOR at best. Nothing more.  
Why would I tolerate him deceiving others just because he's a curator?
16  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: January 01, 2020, 02:22:48 PM
I am more concerned about Armstrong's long term predictions, let's go over them:

-Euro is gonna collapse, European Union will fall
-Dollar is gonna go up a lot
-Dow Jones will keep going up to 35000 points, because with negative interest rates in Europe that's where the money will go
-Despite the strong dollar, Gold will go up significantly because of people won't trust the governments anymore.
-Copper will go up because of electric vehicles and demand in China.
-Emerging markets are gonna pop up because of strong dollar, they won't be able to pay the debt denominated in dollars.
-Thanks to colding, commodities like corn will go up because of bad harvest (it already happened in 2019)

How do you feel about these claims?

No deadlines in what you just listed, thus:  

if it does not happen - he is not incorrect, but if it happens - he is correct.

Please people, provide some sources for his predictions if possible so we can see if he had some target dates, and if he really predicted what you listed in the first place.
17  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: -- The Riddle of the Twin Brothers - Who Were, Are and Will Rule the World! on: January 01, 2020, 01:31:31 PM
2020 is the year the Phoenix rises.

Sounds cool, but not really. It's actually year of the RAT

🐀



Well, technically it starts Jan 25, but just saying.
18  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 31, 2019, 11:33:45 AM
Martin will also try to convince you that he "clearly" predicted Trump 2016 victory:  

Posted Mar 21, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

Our model CLEARLY forecast Trump would win and it targeted the 2016 election.

However, if you read the following

Posted Aug 3, 2016 by Martin Armstrong

Our model is not unanimous for Trump. There is technically a 25% chance that Hillary could win, which one of our four models projects a Democratic victory.

You can notice he didn't really predict it.  It just happens that he placed his odds on Trump, but so had millions of other people.  
He also had a way out for every situation, he covered election rigging,

Posted Aug 24, 2016 by Martin Armstrong
Looking at the Electoral College, yes it appears to be a close race again. The population voting models only give Hillary a 25% chance of winning. But the press is in all out war against Trump and the American people creating propaganda like we have never seen in American history.  
Once again, I will say this. UNLESS there is a huge turnout, they will UNDOUBTEDLY rig the game for Hillary. You have the Republican Elite who behind the curtain are pushing for Hillary. So I would also have to assume they will rig the election every which way possible. There is far too much at stake to allow an OUTSIDER to go to Washington. They stole state from Bernie to make sure Hillary won. Without that, Bernie would have been the candidate.


So I believe they will rig the game. The cannot afford a Trump victory. IF THERE IS A HUGE popular turnout that puts Trump in that 60% category, I believe they will assassinate him. He would tear the bankers apart and has already stated he will end nation-building, which is the life-blood of neoconservative. Maybe I am wrong and Trump will win. That remains to be seen for my opinion is not worth much – it’s just opinion.


And also assasination:  

Posted Mar 28, 2016 by Martin Armstrong

Whenever the establishment is seriously threatened, they respond with assassination.  
Donald Trump is flying in the face of people so corrupt that they would not hesitate to have him assassinated somehow, be it a plane or car crash or under the pretense of some minority who gets amazing access. This is standard operating procedure and it is dominant throughout history from ancient times to the present.

If Trump was not elected, and outcome was something else, Armstrong would technically not be wrong, but instead he would refer to these posts instead.  

In other words - nothing he "predicts" is "clear" as he says, but instead he tells you it's "clear" only when he wins his bets.

EDIT:  

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/the-computer-projects-have-no-human-bias-or-input/


Quote
Three of our models project a strong Republican victory, but one favors the Democrats in a dead heat. This is a percent of the popular vote.


Armstrong's model (or rather 4 models? whatever) projected that Trump would win popular vote.  
Specifically, 3 out of 4 models projected that Trump would win popular vote in 2016 elections, thus Martin gave Trump 75% of winning (I mentioned it and quoted in my post).  

However, Trump ACTUALLY LOST POPULAR VOTE. Thus his models were flat out incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election  
> Trump is the fifth person in U.S. history to become president while losing the nationwide popular vote.


EDIT 2:

Posted Jan 26, 2013 by Martin Armstrong

Our model shows we will get a spike rise in third party activity for 2016.



Panic of 1878 and again with the Panic of 1929 unfolding into the Great Depression.

We are facing such a spike in third party activity coming in 2016 and we have been forecasting that date since 1995.


There was no such spike whatsoever, no matter how much you rotate his fancy 3d chart:  

 
The national total for third party candidates and write-ins was well over 5%.


> Third-party candidates haven't won many votes lately

With the potential split in the Republican Party, we should see a rise in Third Party activity within the House of Representatives.

The sharp rise in third party activity suggests we are heading for a split in the Republican Party. This previously took place when Abraham Lincoln became the first Republican president, and then Teddy Roosevelt split and formed the Progress Party in 1912. The spike you see there in 1855 was due to the fact that Republican Party split into a third party.
19  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 31, 2019, 10:48:11 AM
so far incorrect

One of his tricks is to not provide a deadline when price should hit his target (for example as you mention with regards to gold).  
Thus when he says "gold below $1,000" he can actually NEVER BE INCORRECT, because the whole thesis is that it's going to happen "eventually".  
In the meantime (while for example gold is above $1,000) he will feed you with "Sorry, it's just not TIME yet" and similar bullshit (implying that he knows when it will happen, but in fact he has no clue), and when (if) it happens, then he will say "it was just TIME" (again, implying that he knew exact day in advance), but never actually called (gave readers info about) exact date.  


In other words, if it does not happen - he is not incorrect, but if it happens - he is correct.



Take the detailed gold example:  
https://busy.org/@traxo/martin-armstrong-gold-bear

Readers were deliberately deceived for years, for whatever reason.  
Now someone might come out and say:  
  - Oh well it's not Armstrongs's fault they opened trades when Martin never advised them to
  - Oh but he has a disclaimer so it's never actually trade advice
  - Oh but you are supposed to trade only Socrates X or Y, not his public writings because those are his "opinion"

However, the problem with all that is Martin never actually flat out say when to buy or sell in the first place, and mostly he doesn't even tell you what his opinion is vs what his "computer" projects.  
You can only try to conclude it yourself from his writings, or his other data.

So in the end it's always up to you when to trade what, but note you can't actually trade anything:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg53208223#msg53208223 thus his projections are completely worthless for trading, but really useful if they give you dopamine once you read about them in hindsight and then go and praise Socrates.

He is fully aware that his listeners/readers trade and lose money based on what he says because they are blinded. IMO there is no excuse for deliberately deceiving your crowd.


20  Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion on: December 30, 2019, 05:31:08 PM
- snip -

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?  

Just click the links such as https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com.  
You'll notice it's actually organized.  
Here is another one:  https://busy.org/@traxo/martin-armstrong-gold-bear

You are the one who appears to be a wanna-be-spoon-fed troll by not bothering to click a single link which was provided, let alone read the content there.  
Appreciate any feedback you might have on the linked materials.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!