Armstrong had clearly stated it would die down, then the pandemic would rise again in 2017. I am thinking it will be an H?N? influenza strain.
iamback we do not see eye to eye on Mr. Armstrong. As I argued earlier.
Armstrong does not disclose his methods. It is easy to claim you have a superior computer model that tracks 32,000 variables. It is far harder to actually develop such a thing. Armstrong is also selling a product (investment advice) so there is a potential financial motive for convincing others he has something that does not necessarily exist.
When I try to find actual documented predictions from 1985 I can't find anything independent ie not published by Armstrong himself.
...
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I just don't see it here.
To the above criticism I would add that I have personally seen Armstrong significantly edit his old writings when his initial writing made him look bad. Specifically he erroneous reported as fact that Citigroup was moving its headquarters from New York to the U.S. Capitol building.
This is just jumping off the cliff. Not only did these people grease enough palms to repeal Dodd Frank, they are now leasing space right in the Capital Building and managed to increase the donation limitation from $32,400 to $324,000.
Looks like the clouds are starting to gather for 2015.75 in a very dramatic way. Maybe it is just time to leave. Oh ya. This is fulfilling the lyrics of the Eagles song Hotel California where you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.
He later significantly revised that post
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/14/are-you-really-ready-for-the-world-to-be-ruled-by-bankers/I do not know the extent to which Armstrong changes his prior writings to "improve" things.
In regards to Armstrong's claims of predicting pandemic in 2018 I would restate my prior arguments that I believe accurate prediction of such an event is impossible.
Most pandemics occur when a pathogen jumps a species barrier to a new host (humans) that are not adapted to it. Such a process should be random and follow a Poisson distribution. The expected time between pandemics should therefore follow an exponential distribution. I am skeptical of the validity of a cyclical model predicting a definitive pandemic date.
I agree that that economic collapse and overpopulation could lead to worsening squalor increased contact with infected animals and increased chance of a pathogen jumping the species barrier. If economic collapse and downturns occurred cyclically that could introduce a cyclic increase in jump probability and the Poisson distribution would not hold.
However, all that would mean is that there would be times of increased risk of a pandemic and times of lesser risk. A higher probability is no guarantee that such a pathogen will jump. The Jump itself would still be a random process. It seems ridiculous to me for anyone to claim there is definitively going to be a pandemic in 2018. The only way to know that with certainly would be if you were the one introducing the pandemic.
My genuine impression of Mr. Armstrong is that he is someone who has predicted, probably correctly, that 2015-2016 is the date when the central banks finally start to lose control and that he is planning to leverage that prediction into $$$ by selling terrified investors (very expensive) investment advice.
However, I am keeping an eye on his predictions.
1) Economy turning down at the end of 2015 and
2) Pandemic in 2018
3) Any others?
I think he is right about #1 and I do not believe #2 is possible to predict unless you are directly involved or communicating with individuals introducing a pandemic. If both predictions #1 and #2 happen on schedule I will revise my opinion accordingly.
