Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year to everyone here. Sorry that I have been away. Too many things that I had to handle.
Gumbi,
Armstrong always claims that his system watches all global capital, and everyone else forecasts in isolated markets, while he can make accurate predictions because all financial markets affect each other.
So let's review his prediction for bitcoin price at the end of 2018 here:
https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com/p/armstrong-said-on-nov-26th-2018-that.html Anybody who took his advice based on annual closing would have been burned so bad.
ANY
honest person with any integrity would have gone back and reviewed his own forecast, and tries to save the readers who made the bad trades based on his advice at the EARLIEST possible moment, if he has made any mistakes. But NOT Armstrong!!
WHY?
Because Armstrong is NEVER concerned about any people who read his public or private blog.
Throughout 2019, he simply will NOT talk about his own mistakes on bitcoin. Well, probably in his entire "forecasting" career, he simply never discussed any of his forecasting mistakes. He/Socrates needs to be trading god, and must continue to maintain an image of zero mistakes.
In logic, the method of proof by contradiction is by starting with an assumption, and shows that it leads to a contradiction. And thus you will know that the original starting assumption is simply false. As an example, ECM is 8.6 years, and also 8.615 years. So if 8.6=8.615, you subtract 8.6 from both sides, and you get 0 = 0.015. Then you multiply 1000 on both side, and you get 0 = 15. Then you divide both side by 15, and you get 0 = 1. Then you add 1 on both sides, and you get 1 = 2. And then once you repeat this process of talking non-sense, you can essentially show that 2 = 3, and 3 = 4, and all the numbers in the entire universe are equal!! That is how Armstrong said HIMSELF that ECM date was 10/1/2015, and ALSO 10/7/2015. Two different dates when his model would be accurate down to the very day every time.
https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com/p/economic-confidence-model.html So by starting out the assumption that Armstrong is able to make successful predictions on all financial markets because his "super-computer" watches all global capital, and that his own prediction on bitcoin has been shown to be so terribly wrong, you know that the original assumption is simply NOT correct.
So if Armstrong cannot "predict" successfully in one single market of bitcoin, how can we know that he can predict stocks or gold successfully? For a charlatan who makes easily 50+ "predictions" every year in so many different markets, you bet that he can hit the bull's eye in one of the 50+ shots. But the problem is WHICH of the 50+ predictions will be correct? That is essentially the same as saying that I will get a head when I flip a coin every time, and about 50% of the time, I will be right. Then I will simply review the successful "predictions", and ignore all the failures. I will be a trading god.
And of course, Armstrong wants to lay the blame on the traders/readers. His "forecasting" keeps changing by keeping track of the markets in HINDSIGHT whether it's late by 1 min, 1 day, or 1 month. It's keeping track, and does NOT SEEM to be wrong. But there is ZERO profit that can be made from a yesterday's "prediction". Gumbi and many pro-Armstrong people promised to show the trading record on this forum, and NONE has been able to shown a consistent profitable trading method that is BASED on Armstrong's models. NONE, but lots of excuses like "I'm just not going to show it to you". Well, if you have time to post here, then you can show it. Otherwise, there is no point to argue FOR Armstrong, or you can just stay away from the forum. I'm not even asking people to post every trade that they make. I'm only ASKING to post the trade based on the SAME selection criteria, and AHEAD of the time, NOT AFTER the fact, when trade is already in profits. You may make 100 trades every month, but if you can post just 1 of them AHEAD of the time using the same consistent criteria, then this forum can productively study the results to see if it is
statistically significant, and discuss the trading method.
If you ask 1024 people to throw the coins 10 times, about 1 of the 1024 people will get 10 heads in a roll. Similarly, we just need to make sure that such result is simply born out of pure chance, or based on trading skills.