Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 60. (Read 647251 times)

Gumbi, don't repeat this BS. You are wasting your time. It is pointless to continue with this discussion because you will try to direct it on a circular path. WE are talking about Armstrong's predictions here. Martin Armstrong says Socrates does them. You are saying they are worthless.

But these reversals you mention fail like everything else. We have the proof. Please read again to get informed how badly the reversals that you try to sell us fail. As can be seen here it is not so much the problem that they fail, but the fact that you try to sell us that they don't fail:

As previously said, Gumbi's posts get replied to in a way that will remind him of the context in which we showed him that he is a charlatan.

Let him be reminded again that we have a model case where this behavior is documented in much detail. 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 Gumbi and cohorts are coming up with now, they get this reply. I know Gumbi just wants this message to go away but I am not going to do him the favor. I am just not taking his baits for more nonsense any more.

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 model case as a standard response reply to show 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.



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 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

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/right-or-wrong-the-dark-side-of-human-nature/

"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... The number define the forecast – NOT my opinion. Most people forecast on what they “think” will happen. I do not play that game. My OPINION is no better than anyone else’s."

@trulycoined everyone here just talks about Armstrong's opinion but nobody seems to follow the reversals. Ultimately the numbers are the only thing worth paying attention too.

Well, for maximum ambiguity, Martin Armstrong wants it both ways and he has covered his behind. He has stated numerous times that one should not believe him if he declares what he says as an opinion - only his computer is always right:

Right or Wrong - The Dark Side of Human Nature

Needless to say, he gives himself credit for whatever he said or mostly never said and as you pointed out, he changes the facts in hindsight to fit his own narrative.

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.

Another curious dissection of MAs "forecasts". Recent posts on these boards have spoken of him getting the UK General Election (GE) wrong, while MA then later claimed (after the event, naturally) that he called it correct.

This MA blog post appears 24 December 2019:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/impeachment-coup-to-overthrown-trump/



Where MA explains:
The British elections came out in line with the computer projections with the Labour (socialists) coming in at the lowest level back to the 1930s.


Side note: MA's geography is slightly off here. It was the UK election, not the British election. Britain = England, Scotland, Wales. UK = all of those, plus Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland was part of the GE, as is the case in all GE's. I wonder if Socrates could have corrected him on this?!


Look at the chart, and now compare to this chart here, from a blog post about the same thing posted 15 Nov 2019, around a month before the GE took place:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/britain/the-coming-british-elections/



The above chart was way off, where the Conservatives (blue line) had one of their best results in the history of the party and Labour (orange line) one of their worst. Liberals did about the same, and the SNP (Scottish party, which has its own Scottish parliament) predictably did well, but nothing that was not expected. "Other" parties, including Farage's, that MA said would do very well, did as expected: barely even a scratch on the larger parties.

And so here you have it.

MA has now changed the chart of his most recent post on 24 December, to make it look like Socrates called the UK (not British!) GE correctly. It did not. And why has the chart from his 24 December post suddenly appeared AFTER the event, but not in any blog post BEFORE the event? I will let you be the judge of that.

Proof, if anyone needed it, of the games MA has been playing ever since he started his "forecasting". It also suggests he is aware this board exists, and needed to "rectify" the accusations of calling the UK GE wrong, with a blog post that lets him bask in the glory of calling it "correct"... After the event has happened, which is a recurring theme.

Even more incredible to the cosmic levels of BS that MA spews, is how the reader cannot be certain what data is being illustrated! In one chart, it is the percentage of the popular vote, in the other, the number of seats held. That IS deceptive to claim glory for a forecast, while using two completely different data sets before and after the event. MA loves to call out climate scientists for playing similar games with AGW!

Also notice how even the charts themselves are designed to be purposefully deceptive? They are almost always in 3D, and the angle of view is always different. This too is illustrated above. How can you possibly compare one chart to another accurately? Answer: you can't. And that suits MA perfectly fine...

I will repeat once again: MA is a master of human psychology and sales, not trading and economics. He went to jail playing this game with institutional investors. He will avoid jail playing the same game with retail investors, where no one has the resources nor the money to do anything about it - much less even notice they are being played for fools.

Caveat emptor.

Socrates is based (coded) on MA's own economic theories - it did not create nor build itself. Where MA explains:

When companies buy back shares to placate investors, historically it is the beginning of the end... Buying back stock to delist is one thing. To do so to try to support share prices – VERY BAD!!!!... Shareholders are DEAD wrong on this one. If they were good traders, they should have sold their shares at the top. It was a clear bubble.

Then that may well be MA's opinion and not Socrates forecast. However, that raises one of the fundamental criticisms of MA: what is his opinion and what is Socrates forecasts? His writing, reports and WECs blend both together, making it very difficult to - in MA's own words - connect the dots.

To my wider point, where Socrates is the creation of MA applying his theories using programming languages as the input and output then, where like above he was wrong, so too must there be a high probability Socrates is wrong as well. This is especially true where such vast data needs to be crunched, and immense computing power (both hardware and energy) required to predict future events "to the day".

I will agree with you that if Socrates made no prediction in that 2013 article, then it is not wrong.

But MA was. And if his theories are wrong, then so too must Socrates.

It would be nice if he admitted as much. It would actually earn him greater respect, credence, and authority.

@trulycoined

The article has nothing to do with socrates... and you cannot say socrates never predicted the move because you never had access to it.

 I have been tracking Apple and for 2019 Socrates elected two monthly bullish reversal  in January...
https://imgur.com/a/ZmBJras

Also a good example of this, a blog post from 2013, where MA explained Apple buying back their stock was the beginning of the end:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/stock-buy-backs-bad-idea/

"Shareholders are DEAD wrong on this one [Apple]. If they were good traders, they should have sold their shares at the top. It was a clear bubble."


Then this happened, where MA has technically admitted he is a bad trader, and the bad traders he was criticising were in fact good traders:




Thank you oh great Socrates!

This also adds further credence to the trend anyone that has tried to use Socrates has observed: whatever it predicts, go the opposite way, and you will usually make money. Not least as Socrates is quite likely MA himself, making things up as he goes along. As can be seen above, had you done the opposite of what MA was saying (or that his *machine had "predicted"), you would have made money.

*It is quite likely the supercomputer doesn't exist, which has been debunked countless times on these boards. Having sat in a WEC hearing MA speak on stage about Socrates and code, even as someone who does not know how to code, it sounded like BS.

You would have missed out on an easy 3x your investment by 2019 - and almost double in little over a year from when that blog post was published. 2013 was the last best buying opportunity post the QE boom seen of March 2009, which was the buying opportunity of the decade... That MA also never wrote about, nor did Socrates predict.

Here is the proof that Martin Armstrong did not actually predict that sports decline. When he first mentioned it, the decline was already in motion:

Football in Decline

It is meaningless chatter. As has been said so many times before, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

If you had taken his prediction "sports have begun a bear market" and "It looks like sports are a great short." seriously and sold Nike Inc. NKE then - that would have been a bad trade. The price is near the all time high now.

Other Martin Armstrong sports "predictions" are summarized here:

Armstrong's Sports Predictions


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

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.

Yeah but... exact date and sh*t... ya know.

Anyway, gotta wonder why he didn't link to a blog in which he predicted it BEFORE it happened. He linked to blogs posted in 2016+.
Orrr. no need to wonder why, but instead he never actually predicted it. Just a thought.


https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/tag/sports/

"Sports" tag dates back to 2016, not earlier. So it seems he invented the forecast after the "decline" and then just tied it to 2015.75 because it fits by coincidence.

So Marty's prediction with the decline in bonds and decline in government since the ECM 2015 turning point didn't pan out, now he suddenly focusses on a presumed declining interest in sports (which traders/investors give a rat's ass about that anyways) since the ECM turning point:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/understanding-cycles/sports-peaked-with-2015-75-and-nfl-has-15000-unsold-seats/


Declining interest in sports probably has more to do with people being more and more addicted to social media and thus have way less time to spend on watching sports. Not really an amazing prediction...

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.

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.

He even declares some of his merchandise as public service "This was not a book intended to make some huge profit. It was done as a public service.". Then he cross-sells his worthless reports, conferences and Socrates for "huge Profit" as it can be implied by his own message above.

A fairly obvious confidence trick.

It still seems to be successful. We need more volunteers who write warning comments on Zerohedge, youtube and other sites that he uses to promote his services.


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

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.

If you check SimilarWeb, both armstrongeconomics.com and ask-socrates.com have been declining past 6 months:

https://www.similarweb.com/website/armstrongeconomics.com

https://www.similarweb.com/website/ask-socrates.com

Keep in mind any tool like the above or Alexa is often inaccurate, but what it does do is indicate the trend (like "Socrates"?!). So it is safe to assume MA has been losing site traffic through 2019. Perhaps that is why he suddenly pulled the "repo crisis" out of nowhere, where he knows another doomsday prophecy will have the tin foil-hat lemmings running back to him?


Also really interesting is Google Trends:
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=%2Fm%2F02prybq,%2Fg%2F11gfk5l23l

I've plotted this against bitcointalk.org for comparison, where around April this year, the forum began heating up with posts and visits.

You can see some of the sub-region areas that are most popular for MA are also the most popular for bitcointalk. Perhaps there is some correlation there and people are beginning to find out MA is playing a big game of fact, fact, BS? It does after all afford him a very nice income while all his wealth was confiscated after jail time.

If his readership are beginning to work him out and realise how often his AI predictions are wrong, that might explain the declining site traffic. I have noticed the quality of blog posts has declined in recent months, and it is generally just a big repeat of the same dross he has been posting past five years. There just isn't much of value any more and if you want to understand what might happen in the markets, there are better, more informed and credible people to listen to in the short amount of time we all have to consume content each day.


Trends also confirms somewhat a decline in volume.

Also interesting is related searches for "martin armstrong":
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=martin%20armstrong

Zerohedge is in there, which I find a weird propaganda site that has similar content to MA's blog: doom and gloom, where the enlightened "insiders" of the group (ZH members) await some future financial Armageddon. They may well be correct, but then even a broken clock is right twice a day.

What is curious is when I attended the 2018 WEC, I got talking to many people there, and someone was waxing lyrical about ZeroHedge - as if it in some way was their guiding light in a news media full of lies... Where ZH is equally as bad and their readership likely border on a demographic that are conspiracy theory nuts.

Hence, much of MA's audience probably are your typical ZH demographic - where Google more or less confirms it - and it is those types of people he targets as he knows they LOVE a good financial doomsday prophecy and are wealthy enough to afford his report/WEC fees.

I've said it before: MA does not excel in trading nor even economics. He excels in understanding the human psyche and salesmanship. If I use an analogy, he identifies the hungry lions, then sells them a big, juicy steak that is actually tofu.

Works. Every. Time.

And he once went to jail for it.

Hello,


His website is still getting a lot of hits but it is on the slide more so ask socrates as it seems people are giving up with the nonsense.

Interesting that the best book ever written which has sold out..... uses a 20$ shutterstock photo as the cover.


lol 

Perhaps more reader comments at amazon than 2019 conference attendees

If we can trust the BSR of 1,044 shown at amazon and the BSR to Sales Calculator then approximately 142 copies were sold per day.



Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

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.

No idea why Amazon allows it.  

Perhaps because it's possible that some of the people read it already:  





And the lulz:  

You are right. But even more so, how can we have these reviews out on the same day he announced it? It think one should report abuse at amazon.com. Total scam.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

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.

He announced the book earlier

Dec 10, 2019:  
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/products/manipulating-the-world-economy-4/  
Dec 11, 2019:  
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/products/manipulating-the-world-economy-at-amazon/

Check review dates, they go back to Dec 10 and 11, dates of those blogs



Very helpful 

Martin Armstrong complains about amazon.com. Isn't this funny? Isn't it also funny that seven positive reviews are out in the first three hours - essentially before the book is even available? Look at all the comments. Armstrong's troll army at work? He should sell his book on his own site. He cannot use any third party because he needs to control the reviews as he does with his own fake reader Q/A posts.



Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

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.

Armstrong's logic is utter nonsense. First it is obvious that Wikipedia cannot be quoted in research because it is dynamic. How could you possibly quote something in research that is subject to change?

But people do not read Wikipedia because they want to quote it. They want to learn something quickly, get some ideas and links to further information and then, perhaps quote the information Wikipedia links to. So he is trying to discredit Wikipedia with something that Wikipedia is not even trying to be.

He hates Wikipedia simply because he cannot control it. He can control his own site because nobody is allowed to write a comment on it. And he can get the Forecaster Movie made for him where he controls the narrative. The Wikipedia article exposes the Forecaster movie for what it is simply by quoting free press articles.

Then he creates that conspiracy theory that the deep state is after him controlling Wikipedia. This is a joke.

Wikipedia is controlled by rules not by individuals. Nobody in the deep state cares about Martin Armstrong. The idea that someone with an agenda would infiltrate Wikipedia for the purpose of harming that Martin Armstrong moron is ridiculous.

Imagine the risk such an agent would take for a zero benefit. Doing this and being exposed would raise Armstrong's profile so much in the alt-conspiracy world that this would thoroughly defeat that hypothetical purpose.


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

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.

Yeah. Appears to be the case.  
So we should for some reason trust his articles which he rarely even sources. Source is himself only sometimes.
I am not saying we should trust msm either, but why would I trust him? Where are his sources? In fact, he sometimes even sources the very publishers he's trying to discredit.


Whatever, what's his source for that claim?  
Is it... the very wikipedia disclaimer?  


So what's the workaround? Just use the same sources as wikipedia does. We are back to square one. Lol.