Quote from: MA_talk on Today at 09:24:34 PM

Quote from: Gumbi on Today at 08:46:28 PM

Quote from: MA_talk on Today at 08:02:07 PM

Gumbi, why do you want to sue AnonymousCoder for defamation, when you are not Armstrong himself?

Isn't that all glories to you, when someone says that you're Armstrong himself? Or is such statement adding to your infamy?

Hey, you still owe me the explanation of how both October 7th and October 1st are ECM dates claimed by Armstrong himself, and Armstrong claims ECM is accurate down to the day.

Geez, accurate down to the day to which date?

Hello Ma_talk,
....
Regarding the ECM dates being different, Ma_talk that is just a typo buddy, Armstrong has revealed in great detail how the ECM dates are calculated. there is not a single blog post that supports it. There is typos found under his writings but there have been only 2/3 that have been found over the course of decades.

Armstrong's core model of ECM was dated 2015.75 as Oct 7th, 2015
https://web.archive.org/web/20190210014758/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/writings/1999-2/the-business-cycle-and-the-future/
by the way, he was unable to properly round 3.1416 to 3142, but rather 3144 days between each ECM dates,

and then he changed his date later to Oct 1st, 2015, claiming that his model produces dates accurate down to the day,
https://web.archive.org/web/20170514145217/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/did-world-war-iii-start-on-the-precise-day-of-the-ecm/

In fact, his 8.6 has 10 fractional digits to allow him to have accuracy down to the day. It's really 8.6153846615
http://web.archive.org/web/20141015175106/http:/armstrongeconomics.com/

Obviously Oct 1st, is not the same date as Oct 7th. And he's got all the future ECM dates to reconcile as TYPO, but of course, they will all be accurate down to the day.

While Gumbi/Armstrong coming in, saying that it's a typo, he does remember to promote Armstrong by throwing in more ambiguous forecasts from Armstrong. Just keep predicting for another 1000 times. You bet Armstrong will get at least one of the predictions right.

so you have 1/2 pages in the course of a 50 year career, wow I'm totally convinced that is so damming.

There is not a single blog post going back as far as 2009 that shows a change in the ECM dates. go ahead and try and find one. If you believe one or two pages is evidence that he changes the ECM dates and it is not a simple typo, then you are beyond stupid.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/blog/page/1224/

You don't understand how forecasting works, you have no understanding about cycles or cyclical analysis and you think your opinion has any worth?