Quote from: r0ach on October 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM

Quote from: iamnotback on October 29, 2016, 08:08:49 AM

his supercomputer modeling of events in time

I'm not an Armstrong fan because he implies two completely irrational claims, that we live in a deterministic universe, and he somehow built a magical computer to unravel the secrets of said universe,

Your heart beats deterministically, the sun rises and sets deterministically, but we don't live in a deterministic universe. Why is that? Answer that question and then you will understand the genius of Armstrong.

Armstrong has never claimed his methods can predict every action of every actor. Nor that he can even predict what exactly which happen on any cycle date. Rather he can just predict that something will happen on a cycle date and that it will be related to some thing in that class of cycle.

So he predict broad long-term effects which repeat with regularity throughout history (note there is a complex interaction of these cycles which the supercomputer sorts out), but he can't predict various short-term actions with much better than 50/50 odds. On the very short-term he might be say 55/45% but on the cycle turn dates, he is closer to 100% but he can't predict what the exact event will be, just its broad taxonomy (e.g. economic confidence, war cycle, etc)

Quote from: r0ach on October 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM

but all the predictions are the equivalent of Chinese fortune cookie proverbs that can be interpreted to mean anything so he can claim he's always right, or that the "timing" of said event has "just been put in motion" but we haven't seen the fruits of it's labor yet. It's all ambiguous fortune cookie stuff.

You don't understand the broad thesis, because you just read a few blogs and don't put in enough effort. I read all his blogs for 4 years. So you see noise, I see patterns. Also I have a high IQ for seeing patterns. I don't know about you.

Quote from: r0ach on October 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM

Quote from: iamnotback on October 29, 2016, 08:08:49 AM

My mistake was assuming BTC was correlated to gold, even though Armstrong never wrote that. That was my mistake, not Armstrong's. I realize now that BTC is correlated to safe haven liquidity same as the dollar and USA stocks.

It's relative to your native currency.

Agreed. Good point. Gold will probably not decline in Euros from here forward.

Quote from: r0ach on October 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM

Things like the Comex and ETFs are trading unallocated metals at 50-100:1 ratio, so that when shit actually hits the fan and there's a run on the fractional reserve metal system, the profits will be ridiculously enormous and I'm 100% sure Armstrong has no idea the date that happens.

I used to preach that nonsense when I was a goldbug. Now I know better.

I see you drank the gold promoter KoolAid. They aren't very smart. I have spoken with the guys from GATA.

Quote from: r0ach on October 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM

This is why the central bankers WANT you to buy Bitcoin instead of silver.

I think they are they are happy if you overpay $2 over spot for the oversupply of silver in the world. There is all the silver you want in 1000oz bars. How much do you need? I'll tell you were you can buy it.

Don't buy 18,000 oz of silver like I did. You'll end up bankrupt like I am.

Quote from: r0ach on October 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM

They get the added bonus that Bitcoin isn't actually decentralized and they can take it over.

Bitcoin is their spying machine and digital kill switch.