Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 20. (Read 647227 times)

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



Take for example Marty's recent blog post:  


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.

Humor time:  


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!

Well done decipher!! good stuff reporting on the famed wec....save your money folks.

Regarding his daily posting I have now noticed its all basically coming from youtube so he must be sat there on you tube endlessly waiting for a vid so he can watch then post something and look like he is ahead of the game.

He has no more idea than anyone else whats going to happen thats why no one has EVER seen his REAL trading account AFTER 40 years with a superduper computer to log his trades with not your ordinary commodore64

Marty give it up with all your different aliases lol.

For people thinking if they should go to any WEC ...

Since MA can not legally give any financial advise - plain fact that he takes care to hide to the plebe, you won't get any advise to manage your money. Reading the free blog is much more interesting than attend his WEC

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.

Blog/Basic Concepts
Posted Feb 10, 2016 by Martin Armstrong

BUY-SELL

COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong, I attended the Berlin Conference and I must say, you told us to expect a move between the Benchmarks in gold, and that the first quarter looked to be a countertrend move. You seem to be able to map out the direction of markets all the time. I am still working out the best way to read the arrays. But I have to ask. Why have you not been given the Noble Prize with such a long track record that is unbeatable?


I was at this WEC, and have evidence of what has been said by MA.

He never said such thing ! It's fabricated answer afterward to make the promotion of the next WEC

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.

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!

Now, can someone be kind to provide the numbers on the latest MA private blog - Gold for the Benchmark, from today, March 26th?

Private Blog:

Gold Elects Monthly Bullish at $1207 On its Way to $1309

Martin Armstrong claims that his model reversed its Gold trade at the end of the year from short to long, months before publishing this event! This is FRAUD.


RTFM at

Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015 and try to refute any of its details or get lost!

It is a fallacy to construct an argument based on falsified hindsight signals or other noise out of context.

The truth can only be obtained by constructing the timeline as is unfolds step by step with only verifiable information that is available at each time step.

The bottom line is that Martin Armstrong's model elected a bearish quarterly reversal at the end of the year 2015, and he waited for the second "Benchmark" in 2016 to produce the final low that would confirm that bearish quarterly reversal.

That did not occur as we know and therefore he was compelled to falsify the record by claiming in hindsight what can be seen in the private blog above.

That bullish hindsight signal was not available to anybody at the end of the year, and we have reports from multiple people confirming this fact in this blog.

Anything else is just a distraction.


Other instances of this fraudulent falsification:

Martin Armstrong The Falsifier


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.

Ok, I did research on MA's blog from that time, and I would pull out his following two posts. First is from Dec 25, 2015, where he writes:
"Therefore, a closing ABOVE 1044.50 for 2015 implies that this is not sufficiently weak enough just yet.
This can mean only that 2016 will produce the lowest closing and 2017 will produce the intraday low."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-update/

And this one from Feb 11, 2016:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-february-crisis-the-prelude-to-chaos/
He writes: "The low came on the first benchmark right on target at 1045 ($1 from our number at 1044) and was 51.6 months from the 2011 high.
The year-end closing ABOVE 1044 warned that gold was “not as weak as it may appear.”"

He is spot on the number (first sentence from the Dec 25 post), but his interpretation in the second sentence is not correct. He said it many times, he is human as well, and as such, his interpretations are not always correct. Anyone with the real trading experience, understands what MA is saying here.
But the numbers are there, and they were correct. MA himself like every other trader has found in a situations where his human emotions are telling him one thing, but the computer is telling other thing.
And, in such battles computer always wins over MA.

Above is what I found, but what I can tell myself, is that MA was spot on, both the number, and his interpretation, on the Monthly Bullish Reversal, I think it was 1362.
I didn't listen, again human emotion, and I blame myself for that, not someone else. Because once that number (which was out for years, provided by MA) was taken out, after 3 years of ranging, Gold took off.
That would have been very lucrative trade.

Yes.  I know today's date.   Historically gold should fall big-time and a lot of people are predicting inflation - but the amount of deflation is unprecedented - so any money entering the system is substantially far less than what is getting destroyed.  Forget the stock market - it's rigged.  We are just at the tip of the iceberg.  Or maybe not.  I know an elderly millionaire who recently sold all of his gold and moved into something else.  I thought he was crazy until he explained his logic.

Is that what your comprehension is of the ECM statement I just posted?  Seems pretty clear to me what the ECM is -- and isn't.

So basically you're saying if something does happen then he right, but nothing happens then he's not wrong?

Yes, he was consistent... in his calls that gold would go sub $1,000 (or rather sub $850) by the end of 2015.
Then actually slightly changed the target to Q1 2016.
Oh, then again changed target for 2017.  

Don't mind me asking, have you checked today's date?

No - it's just that I know how to read and understand language:

So essentially what saying is Armstrong can't predict anything to the day, but Armstrong says he does? Then what is the point of the ECM?

Last try:

To put it very simply - one more time - the $5000 gold call is what he thinks gold could go to in the event of a currency crisis.  That is not difficult to understand and totally makes perfect sense.  That is like any other forecaster making a call of what gold could get to when there is a currency crisis.  It is not exclusive to Armstrong.

I went to that link you posted on Armstrongs post on gold - and he was very consistent in his calls.  Goldman Sachs also proposed sub $1000 gold.  For all we know we may see $700 gold soon... or less.  

I'll make a prediction on Bitcoin:  $2100 or less by 4/2021.  Lower if the Coronavirus escalates.  

Wow, you just admitted Armstrong is an idiot. I guess you forgot about his ECM?

That wasn't implied.


Caca again. He will not announce it (time), but instead only in hindsight he will come out as a hero. 
If it's pegged to an event as you say, he will not really predict the event, but will claim that he had. If on the contrary he can predict the event (timing of), then it's in effect pegged to a date. Back to square one.