Martin Armstrong Discussion

[Traxo]

Humor time:  

Is Greta Trying to Cash in on the Coronavirus?

Meanwhile, Marty has already published ~ 50 blog posts tagged `coronavirus`:  
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/tag/coronavirus/

And will sell you numerous coronavirus reports, only $9.95 each!

[Traxo]

One of the haters says he agrees with the views of Armstrong.

"Broken clock....besides who doesn't share the same views as his?"
Caymen Jack on March 19

Yes, but that's besides the point. We actually pointed out something similar earlier.

Thanks trulycoined.

Martin Armstrong has been running a sophisticated scam for many years. So sophisticated that part of your message is worth repeating and re-inforcing.

...
and people are beginning to find out MA is playing a big game of fact, fact, BS?
...

Yes. That is the pattern. Give away the facts and sell BS. He is giving away for free (re-publishing) much material that is available for free elsewhere as well.

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?

Take for example Marty's recent blog post:  

John Hopkins has aided in creating this panic with their graphics which gives the impression that all of Europe and China are infected. They have visually greatly exaggerated the spread of this virus and appear to be enjoying the havoc they have caused, as if this were some video game. The total population of China was 1.386 billion in 2017. The total number of cases was 0.01%, yet their red dots make it appear that the entire population is infected.

Our local media here in Croatia used the same graphics from that site, so I remember when I first saw it weeks ago, immediately I had the same thought - that it's deliberately visually misleading to increase the panic (regardless whether the panic is justified or not). So I agree with "his view" as you call it.  
In fact, they are employing the same tactic themselves:  https://i.imgur.com/bYggV9i.png
Fear sells I guess. So everybody has to constantly write about corona, else they lose views.  
As you can see in the post above, even Marty is writing about it non-stop, does he even sleep? But he will accuse others of trying to cash-in on certain events, while doing the same thing. Hypocrite?  

If he's the only blogger you read, then yeah you might get the impression that he's original and that everything he writes about are "his views" (because he brainwashed you into thinking he's the smartest dude and has all the answers?). In actuality, many people came to same conclusions, he's just republishing it in his own words (as I said, that makes him content curator, not genius).  


But the point is, this "bashing" (as you acolytes call it) is not about disagreement or having different views. It's about Armstrong deliberately misleading readers with regards to his predictions, which creates false impression that buying his junk will make buyers profit financially.  
And for that he's being exposed here.

[Angus_P]

Wow. Ok.
Thanks Digi and Over for your replies, but I have a few problems with them.

I cannot rely on going back to those blog posts. I know for a fact that Mr A deletes posts. Not often, but he does. What is to stop him from changing them as well?

I remember pretty clearly what was said in the first public post about gold under 1000. I, and a whole lot of other people apparently, shorted gold based on that post and the other 2 posts, (though I can only find 1 other for a total of 2 posts as well), and kept a pretty close eye on the blog for more info.
Why would we short it? Mr A had a computer that could tell the future and Mr A was rather convincing about it being true. Gold must be going under 1000 since if he has such a computer, he must be telling us what it was telling him. right?
I remember very clearly, after Mr A said in June '16, 'See? I told you it was going up', very clearly going back to that same post and seeing one sentence mentioning about the number it was to go over for a bullish run.
I remember very clearly posting that exact same bearish paragraph containing the bullish number about a year after on another forum which at the time consisted of mostly ECM attendees.
After reading this blog and wanting to ask the questions I now ask, I went back and read that first post again and it doesn't really appear to be the same as I remember. Yes, It could be me. I am not able to pull all of these various numbers out of my head like some folks can so I have to go by what I remember..........and yea, I know that can be an issue right there.
I wish I had access to the copy and paste post I did in around 2017 of that paragraph and sentence, but that part of the forum is locked up. It's a Slack forum and they lock up old posts so you have to pay to see them.

Anyway, I understand the point of view that Mr A is fallible, but he has in the past called his computer infallible. Doesn't he check the computer once in a while before or after writing posts?
Sure Mr A says time is the hardest to predict.....

At some point gold rose above that number in the first gold under 1000 post. Why didn't he then, after gold closed above that number, then turn around and publish on the public blog that gold was now going to go higher? He told a lot of readers it was gong under 1000 shouldn;t he have told those same readers it was now going on a bullish run?

Uuhhhh....At this point I'm beating a dead horse. Ha ha haaaaaa............

I'll sum up my thoughts another time.

[AnonymousCoder]

Wow. Ok.
Thanks Digi and Over for your replies, but I have a few problems with them.
...
At some point gold rose above that number in the first gold under 1000 post. Why didn't he then, after gold closed above that number, then turn around and publish on the public blog that gold was now going to go higher? He told a lot of readers it was gong under 1000 shouldn;t he have told those same readers it was now going on a bullish run?

Uuhhhh....At this point I'm beating a dead horse. Ha ha haaaaaa............

I'll sum up my thoughts another time.

Don't worry too much. His computer is stupid. It cannot predict anything. It cannot reverse direction until it is too late.

It took me years to figure out the fraud in this case. Now it is fully documented here:

Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015

Just click on the link and read that page. And everything else on the site.

The cat is out of the bag, armstrongeconomics.com is a scam.

You say you think he deleted and possibly modified posts. There are other users who found out:

I am so glad I happened on to this blog. I have been trying to figure out this guy's ramblings for far too long. I got sucked in by the Forecaster movie - that's a compelling story. I subscribed to his website and analyzed his posts (no easy feat) for the past year. I began to notice what appeared to be revisions in his historical posts to align with reality. I began to screen print his advice/predictions (no way to print otherwise) so I could compare. Yep - proved that. Have cancelled subscription.

Don't worry about the slack forum - ask the people there to come over here. The slack forum as you say doesn't show older posts unless you pay, and it cannot be searched using google so it is fairly useless. Most people in that slack forum have already gone anyway.

Martin A. Armstrong: convicted felon, shameless conman, schizophrenic crackpot & financial comedian

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

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.

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

[decipher11]

Bullshit excuse. What kind of forecast is that - eventually.

Well then you are an idiot also if you think that can be predicted to a specific target date.  

Over45, Martin, fabricated lies as usual, the most interesting thing about Armstrong was his pretended ability using Socraps to predict the future ... period

To support his claim you have to learn to read the infamous ECM and more infamous forecast Arrays.

Over45 have you ever see a forecast array ?




 

[over45]

Bullshit excuse. What kind of forecast is that - eventually.

Well then you are an idiot also if you think that can be predicted to a specific target date.

Armstrong and his supporters claim the ECM can predict things to the date, otherwise what is the point of having specific dates? Then you say people are idiots for thinking so.

This subject is his call on gold reaching $5000 or so when there is a currency crisis and people lose faith in govt.  You would have to be a complete idiot to assume that this call is being made to a specific date in time.  Clueless if you believe that.

An explanation of the ECM was provided.  The turn dates are exactly what is stated - change in trends.  Sometimes something happens to the day on the stated change of trend that is noticeable, sometimes not.  This is not rocket science to understand.

Learn to read and comprehend what is written. 

[AnonymousCoder]

Bullshit excuse. What kind of forecast is that - eventually.

Well then you are an idiot also if you think that can be predicted to a specific target date.

Armstrong and his supporters claim the ECM can predict things to the date, otherwise what is the point of having specific dates? Then you say people are idiots for thinking so.

This subject is his call on gold reaching $5000 or so when there is a currency crisis and people lose faith in govt. You would have to be a complete idiot to assume that this call is being made to a specific date in time. Clueless if you believe that.

An explanation of the ECM was provided. The turn dates are exactly what is stated - change in trends. Sometimes something happens to the day on the stated change of trend that is noticeable, sometimes not. This is not rocket science to understand.

Learn to read and comprehend what is written.

Well then you are an idiot also if you think that can be predicted to a specific target date.

The point is: ?that $5000 call is what he has said gold will go to when there is a currency crisis. That's not a bullshit call. The bullshit is you thinking it has to be pegged to a specific date and not an event. - Do you bashers even comprehend written language ?

We read the evidence and derive our conclusions.

Proof:

Martin Armstrong
Gold Call $5,000 +
with target date 2016

Will Gold reach $5,000 +? (Click on link to get context)

P13:
A 21 year bull market in stocks points to 2015 and a 17.2 year high in gold points to 2016.
P14:
However, if gold exceeds this level and it too forms the subsequent support, now we are looking at the
$3,500 to $5,000 target zone. This is where we see the potential for Gold is a true economic meltdown of Confidence.

GOLD $5,000 + (Click on link to get context)

P13:
Technical support will be at the $800 level for 2010. Holding this will keep the bullish momentum in place. We should see a temporary high in 2010-11 with a retest of support perhaps into 2012-13 with a rally into 2016.

You call us idiots - we pull out the facts and you ...




over45 you need to get a break because you have fallen flat on your face as much as Gumbi needs a break because he has also fallen flat on his face here once again.


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

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


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

[over45]

well you are an idiot if you deduce from what he wrote (the snippets you provide outside of the complete postings) says that gold is going to $5000 in 2016 - even though your argument is that it is supposed to be to the day. 

everything has to be taken in context. 

Next...

[over45]

Martin Armstrong
Gold Call $5,000 +
with target date 2016

Will Gold reach $5,000 +? (Click on link to get context)
Quote
P13:
A 21 year bull market in stocks points to 2015 and a 17.2 year high in gold points to 2016.
P14:
However, if gold exceeds this level and it too forms the subsequent support, now we are looking at the
$3,500 to $5,000 target zone. This is where we see the potential for Gold is a true economic meltdown of Confidence.

GOLD $5,000 + (Click on link to get context)
Quote
P13:
Technical support will be at the $800 level for 2010. Holding this will keep the bullish momentum in place. We should see a temporary high in 2010-11 with a retest of support perhaps into 2012-13 with a rally into 2016.

Anyone who wants to see the lengths and depths Anonymous Coder will go in an attempt to disparage Armstrong need only look at this quoted post above and then click on the links where she says to get context.  They are copies of hand written reports written in 2009, throughout which there are continuous statements that "if this were to happen than we could see this" ... etc.   In other words -- everything has to be taken in context. 

I suggest everyone read these reports because it will show you just how knowledgeable Armstrong really is - and how lame Anoymous Coder is for even attempting to present this information the way she did.

[AnonymousCoder]

Anyone who wants to see the lengths and depths Anonymous Coder will go in an attempt to disparage Armstrong need only look at this quoted post above and then click on the links where she says to get context.  They are copies of hand written reports written in 2009, throughout which there are continuous statements that "if this were to happen than we could see this" ... etc.   In other words -- everything has to be taken in context. 

I suggest everyone read these reports because it will show you just how knowledgeable Armstrong really is - and how lame Anoymous Coder is for even attempting to present this information the way she did.

Perhaps you want me to quote forecasts made AFTER the target date 2016 

I know that would suit you

 

Or should I say: Which of the perhaps dozens of different $5,000 shotgun Gold calls should I quote?

 

Or perhaps you want to redefine and teach us the meaning of the word "forecast"

Whatever it is, keep posting my friend - I love it.

[AnonymousCoder]

Fraud Warning

Martin Armstrong is publishing misleading content here under his handle over45.

What is he saying this time? Bankrupt contradictions and personal attacks, mud slinging This is spam. He spammed this thread with over 80 posts without providing a single coherent response. Game over. He is being ridiculed and he does not deserve any respect because he is just wasting other people's time.

He has being exposed again for being a fraud for saying

Well then you are an idiot also if you think that can be predicted to a specific target date.

That is obviously just mud slinging without facts to evade the truth that predictions need a target date of some kind for qualifying as such and be verifiable.

He pays the price of being ridiculed for his refusal to accept that his USD5,000 Gold prediction years ago went wrong, now saying that this "prediction" did not have a target date.

Bankrupt.

He also recently posted here as m96 and under Gumbi. Gumbi needs a break because he has fallen flat on his face here once again.

His scheme has been exposed many times. The damage is done. Irreversible damage. It's a scam. Game over. There are just too many facts.

You are welcome to check the facts here.

The charlatan has no clothes.


Marty, unfortunately MANY people who bought your reports are very unhappy.

Please refer to the following recent sample case:

Fraudulent Blog Post Revisions

If you want to contact Marty directly, just send a private message here: Contact Martin Armstrong and daughter.

Once again Martin Armstrong is denied the option to use this forum for fraudulent advertising. Yes, fraudulent advertising, false advertising. And we are here to take corrective action with information, just the facts.

Meanwhile, our themes of the day are still "Which Government has asked Martin Armstrong for Advice?", "Socrates Technical Analysis Prediction Magic" and "Economic Advice by Martin Armstrong".



And YOU MARTY (posting as over45 here), you get your standard reminder as promised. You fight facts with spam, you get the warning. You have been warned!

As previously said, Gumbi's and cohorts' posts get replied to in a way that will remind them of the context in which we showed them that Martin Armstrong is a charlatan.

Let him be reminded again that we have a model case where this behavior is documented in much detail. Here we show how Martin Armstrong's fraud manifests itself. Beyond any doubt. A self-documenting case. It actually saves time and effort to repeat this as opposed to wasting the time trying to argue this same type of thing without end.

Whatever smokescreen over45, Gumbi, m96, Alex-11 and cohorts are coming up with now, they get this reply. I know they just want this message to go away but I am not going to do Martin Armstrong the favor.

The pattern is the same again and again: Pick one of the ambiguous conflicting Socrates signals in hindsight to argue the case. For us, there is no need to formulate a custom response to that. We use this standard response that documents the following model case. To show everyone what these charlatans are doing.

I have an obligation to spread the message for the honest people, and as painful as it is for me, I am going to persevere until the Armstrong promoters shut up. So they are warned. The honest people have all the facts on their side.

AnonymousCoder"Quarterly reversal time unit is one quarter. Gold rallied before the quarter was over and no other signal in the opposite direction was available to indicate change of direction.

The time span is 1 to 3 units in time so the quarterly bearish reversal had 1 to 3 quarters before time was up.

Armstrong wrote on his private blog on the first of March our quarterly level of the model generated a bullish reversal at the end of the year reversing its short position and going long. This also signaled that gold would rally from the $1060 area and should test the next bullish reversal at the $1347 level."

Not sure if you are aware or not but you are losing this discussion.

Here we go. You are providing the proof of my assertion yourself!

Hindsight, Fraud. This hindsight message is fraudulent misrepresentation of performance, pure fraud!
Now here you are saying, and I know you are speaking for Martin Armstrong, that


Martin Armstrong had this information, this bullish signal, the fact that his model went long - at the end of the year - but at the same time failed to tell his clients?

In fact he sent the opposite signal to his clients at the time!

If he knew this at the time when he claimed the system went long, and let's assume for the sake of argument that what you say is true then he could have been trading against his clients because he published this signal only three months later.

You are not worth the respect of a single honest being on earth! You are a fraud!


And yes, I have all the reports. How could I otherwise quote them? I have everything!

More importantly, all other people who lost, they have everything as well.



Here is a detailed time line of the events:


Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015

Martin A. Armstrong: convicted felon, shameless conman, schizophrenic crackpot & financial comedian

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

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


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

[DigiLab]

I cannot rely on going back to those blog posts. I know for a fact that Mr A deletes posts. Not often, but he does. What is to stop him from changing them as well?

Through the brief search, there is another post where the number 1044 is being brought up again, clearly. Likely the disconnect is people following MA's opinion, not the number.
This post is actually on the last day of 2015, for yearly closings.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/closings-today-will-be-the-year-end-signals/

[over45]

Martin Armstrong self forged lies

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/basic-concepts/the-real-implications-of-forecasting-more-profound-than-you-think/


REPLY: The fact that we can forecast any event to the day PROVES that markets are by no means RANDOM.

You are misinterpreting what he is saying.  He is saying that the fact that we can forecast any (meaning even one) event to the day PROVES that markets are by no means RANDOM. 

[AnonymousCoder]

Just the Facts
As Usual

I cannot rely on going back to those blog posts. I know for a fact that Mr A deletes posts. Not often, but he does. What is to stop him from changing them as well?

Through the brief search, there is another post where the number 1044 is being brought up again, clearly. Likely the disconnect is people following MA's opinion, not the number.
This post is actually on the last day of 2015, for yearly closings.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/closings-today-will-be-the-year-end-signals/

Number? another Number? Yeah. Number. Blah Blah Blah.


Facts:

End 2015 close 1060.20
Quarterly Bearish Reversal 1111 elected.
Quarterly Bearish Reversal 1112 elected.

Year End Report 2015, publish date: December 1 2015:

When we look at gold going into year-2015, we see absolute critical support at
1044. A year-end closing g beneath this level will signal new lows and they can
be quite dramatic. From a technical perspective, the two key targets will be
1026 and 601. Important resistance during 2016 will begin at 1179 with key
resistance forming at 1310. Therefore, even a year-end closing for 2015 below
1179 will keep gold in a bearish position.
Additionally, we have a Quarterly Bearish Reversal at 1112. Therefore, a yearend
closing below this level should also warn of a drop becomes possible at
least to test the 875 to 904 former high of 1980. A monthly closing beneath 904
would also point to a drop way down to the 680 area.

I found out about M.A. around half a year ago. Myself being an engineer, I don't want to learn, I want to understand.
And for me that was possible only following M.A.

An engineer needs Martin Armstrong to understand?

Perhaps time to go back to school to catch up?

Gestern wusste ich nicht wie man das Wort "Ingenieur" schreibt, heute bin ich einen.


But remember the joke about tigers. Why do you blow the horn? To keep the tigers away. But there are no tigers here. There you see!

[over45]

Year End Report 2015, publish date: December 1 2015:

How can you have a year end report before the end of the year? 

Additionally, we have a Quarterly Bearish Reversal at 1112. Therefore, a yearend
closing below this level should also warn of a drop

becomes possible

[/u] at
least to test the 875 to 904 former high of 1980. A monthly closing beneath 904
would also point to a drop way down to the 680 area.

Emphasis added.  Learn to read.

[fabiorem]

Only now I'm paying more attention to this guy. Can someone tell me if his forecasts are trustworthy? What method he uses for TA?

I also want to know more about STOs. Do Armstrong supports them, and for what reason?

[AnonymousCoder]

Only now I'm paying more attention to this guy. Can someone tell me if his forecasts are trustworthy? What method he uses for TA?

I also want to know more about STOs. Do Armstrong supports them, and for what reason?

RTFM armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com

[AnonymousCoder]

Emphasis added.  Learn to read.

Learn to understand. Keep posting. Keep exhausting yourself!

[AnonymousCoder]

Regular Socrates Warning Broadcast
It's a Scam

We don't want to spam this thread so go here: (click)

[CaymanJack]

Martin Armstrong self forged lies

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/basic-concepts/the-real-implications-of-forecasting-more-profound-than-you-think/


REPLY: The fact that we can forecast any event to the day PROVES that markets are by no means RANDOM.

You are misinterpreting what he is saying.  He is saying that the fact that we can forecast any (meaning even one) event to the day PROVES that markets are by no means RANDOM. 

Well then you are an idiot also if you think that can be predicted to a specific target date.  

What are you going to eat for dinner in 47 days?  

LOL, do you even read your own comments? Your speaking out both sides of your mouth.