Correlation is not causation. Notice he doesn't predict the specific event that correlated to a turn date on his cyclical models.
He predicts dates, and sees what happens when those dates come.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/understanding-cycles/did-the-economic-confidence-model-pick-the-trump-tax-reform/ If his model really works, he should be abundantly wealthy already. Advancing the known science would be the next logical goal for someone who claims to value humanity so much.
I'm sure he's wealthy. He's not in it to be mega rich, he's here to help the world. He states that many times on his blog
https://www.armstrongeconomics.comBut I'm not convinced that he has invented any new science. But I'm not accusing him of not. I'm just saying I will be skeptical until Armstrong explains his work in technical terms, not just glossing over the details to convince laymen.
He hasn't invented any science. All he saw was that everything has patterns, and it's related to Pi. That's his break through. One of his latest focus is the global cooling, which it's looking correct. Martin Armstrong is a genius for finding the pattern (in my opinion)