Quote from: Alex-11 on July 15, 2019, 06:06:27 PM

Quote from: s29 on July 15, 2019, 02:45:26 PM

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/interest-rates/how-long-can-artificially-low-interest-rates-be-maintained...
...... I am sure I will be the scapegoat and the fake news will keep that image in motion and support the Deep State as they always do. se of the implosion.

Marty is the ideal scapegoat. He is a speculator, a enemy of the banks and he was already in prison.
When the next crash comes , they surely need scapegoat's. Not one, but several of them.

I any case. What I don't get is, why would the banksters still need the Socrates code. Now that Socrates has been released they could simply use it them self.
But of course , if only them would have the code, then they would be the only one's who'd have it.

I'm interrested in criticism, but please spare comments like, Armstrong is a fraud. I'm not interested.

In any debate, both sides present their evidences to support their arguments.

That is what I have been trying to do, but the opposing side hasn't presented anything that can stand up to any statistical test.

Here is a summary on Martin Armstrong. If you need to get the details & links, it's all at armstrong ecm scam . blogspot . com

1. He claimed that his algorithm will take up 90+% of the super-computer annual capacity, which is solely owned by government, and whose usage was intended for research.

2. He claimed that ECM date is accurate down to the day, and yet he said it's 10/1/2015, and also 10/7/2015. If it's accurate down to the day, ECM date cannot be on two dates.

3. He forecasted a bitcoin drop to 775 this year, and yet bitcoin is at about 10400.

4. He claimed that his office building construction is near completion. Made the whole thing sounded like he owned the entire building, when in fact, he probably would just time-share the office with someone else.

5. The readers' comments are most likely made up by him, with the same blatant typos in such short sentences.

6. The Greatest Trade of Century report had 1 page of forecast out of 280+ pages. And that single page forecast said NOTHING about any time frame.

7. His Socrates reports had revisions after-the-fact, documented by AnonymousCoder.

8. He stated gold will break $1000 in WEC conference. Caused lots of losses to attendees, and yet, later he claimed successful predictions, post-event, again.

9. NOBODY out of possibly 1000+ people on this forum after about 300 pages of discussion and after many years has found a successful trading strategy using Socrates. The only pro-Socrates argument is that it's too complex for ordinary human to understand. That is ridiculous as I have argued, since if it's too complex to be understood, then why bother subscribing to the service? Huh

And exactly because it is complicate, it should be all coded up into the computer algorithm to produce buy/sell signals. Duh? Aren't we talking about AI? And isn't that the whole purpose of trading? But obviously, producing such signals will immediately defeat Armstrong's goal to confound the readers, and document Armstrong's own failures.

10. From the scooter man blog post, Armstrong doesn't even have the most basic understanding of science that energy is the system is always conserved. It can neither be destroyed or created.

I kept saying that if a trading method works, then it can be repeated by anyone else, and have the trades executed without human intervention nor emotions. But NOBODY can show any functional trading methods based on Socrates. Science is always repeatable. Anybody who measures the density of water at a given temperature/pressure will always get the same answer. That is called Science.

If you only select the correct forecasts, and ignore all the wrong forecasts from Armstrong, or
if you only attribute the winning trades to Socrates, but claim the responsibilities for all the losing trades for yourself, or
if you always pick the few lucky/capable traders who filtered out the wrong signals from Socrates, but ignore all the other average traders who simply follow Socrates blindly,

they are all in essence manipulating the statistics, and cherry-pick the results.

I'm not denying that Armstrong "may have" had some good calls. But I'm saying that to MAKE a PROFIT, you cannot wait for all 100 calls by Armstrong to become reality, and then cherry-pick only the good calls. Because good calls are only known to be good, POST-EVENT, at which time, the information becomes useless.

The strategy taken by Martin Armstrong is obviously to be a "charlatan" and predicts as many outrageous calls as possible, and just hope that one of them turns out to be correct. The recollection process of the human memory will not register all of the insignificant events (all the bad calls, assuming that you didn't trade on it), but only registers the most significant events (the very few good calls that you MISSED).

The entire discussion forum is obviously about finding the illusive profits from Armstrong's blog and Socrates reports.

And to show that Armstrong's stuffs have values, the trading method MUST be statistically and significantly profitable.

No one-time wonders (well, assuming that Armstrong did call them.)