I agree.

We can prove that Martin Armstrong often fits his model in hindsight to some common sense discovery. He then later fraudulently claims that his model predicted what others have concluded after their research.

We have a good example with The Myth of the Martin Armstrong Global Cooling Prediction.

Even before global cooling was on the agenda, he disagreed with the anthropogenic global warming. At that time he did not have a global cooling forecast.

So yes, we do not need the ECM and Socrates for making sound trading decisions.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud.

See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog