yes, his opposition to bitcoin is weak and falls into the ponzi/pyramid/internet goes away etc excuses. Another reason he gives is that government wont allow it, which in the eyes of many is the whole point. But, in saying that, I'd say he has moderated his views over the last few months. I like his currency stuff and he makes some sensible arguments for gold, but his bitcoin stuff is meh.

What's worse, is that we already do.
Back it with Gold, with our time, with silver, with whatever we are willing to part with for some bitcoin.

All your bitcoin are redeemable for gold and silver and whatever else you might like to spend them on.  
About a year ago, I offered to back all of bitcoin with silver at 4 ounces of Bitcoin Specie to a bitcoin, which was about the price at the time.  Some folks took me up on it and there is a lot of Bitcoin Specie out there as a result.

Neither Turk nor Rickards are stupid, but havn't studied Bitcoin enough to really get it yet.  They are however professional experts, so they get the spotlight.

Bitcoin is entirely unproven. It is immature.  It has barely been in the public eye for long enough to be seriously studied and reviewed.

WE are the crazy ones.  Gold is over 4000 years as money and has mountains of evidence as being the "gold standard" for money.  Being the crazy ones, we have the opportunity to change the world.  It is up to us to convince them since they are the experts and have spent a lifetime getting to the point where the whole world knows them and values their opinion.

One by one, they will see it.  Can't expect more than that.

And be grateful for the time it takes for them to 'get it'.  That fact is why you have as many coins as you have.
If they are accumulating BTC and not talking about it until they do, that is another matter.  Though I doubt its the case for Rickards at least.  He seems very willing to say unpopular things to people that will be unhappy about it.

Hmmm, the sort of people I would take seriously have already put Bitcoin through a great deal of study and provenance, ever had your wallet stolen? This is just like those that say things like "one day, Bitcoin will be a viable method for transferring money". When what they're really saying is "one day, I'll stop putting it off and use the damn thing". I've personally been using bitcoin for all of the purposes that it supposedly can't be considered for yet for several years now.

# I dont think it fits that definition because its value rises from usage but pyramid can be just purchase.
A pyramid has no usage and for gains to occur it must employ ever more greater numbers or it all fails.  I dont think btc requires more people just to carry on

Its a minor recent part of his business, he mostly manages funds and he could choose gold and btc if wanted but his line is really about actual 'physical' ownership I think.  They probably do own foreign bonds though which is fiat.  Also shares can end up as broken promises also so I dont see why it should be impossible to convince him of worth here.  BTC is superior in many ways but it does not carry title to anything 'solid'

Schiff mentioned a gold based crypto currency, damned if I ever heard of it.  P something ?  He still disagreed as its merely token or 1% of gold worth not 1:1    He then went onto describe a currency that was run with a central deposit and had no miners, you just rely on the vault to verify the gold and issue gold digital tokens - of course this isnt crypto currency at all more like GLD  which we've had quite a while  

Last time I remember you had some different thoughts about effective governments would be at dictating the fate of cryptocurrencies.

Anyway, if you do come down do it on the 10th. That's when we're bringing in Charlie Shrem in via Google Hangout.

no mas? 

best not ignore:

I appreciate the sentiment of the anti-establishment people. Prisons and unemployment lines are full of them. The best way to win a war isn't always a direct assault. I'm in the long game. My goal is to eliminate the need for money as well as governments. To me, Bitcoin is just a transitional technology that will help us get there and help me with my rapidly approaching golden years.

The problem I have with gold bugs who advocate a gold backed currency such as Rickards and Schiff is that gold backed currency has been tried and failed. It failed because of a central point of failure and in the US this central point of failure is the federal reserve and it failed to maintain a dollar peg to gold.  Einstein's definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."  By that definition, all gold bugs who want a gold backed currency are insane because it has been tried and failed miserably.  Don't try it again.  Bitcoiners are the sane ones for trying something different.

A gold backed digital currency would be great but these three conditions cannot exist simultaneously for money:
1.  Digital
2.  Backed by gold
3.  No third party risk (no central point of failure - decentralized)

The next best thing is to have 1 and 3 exist simultaneously, which leaves us with bitcoin.