Martin Armstrong - why promote a scammer?

[Kosma]

Kosma and I had an exchange about Armstrong over 5 years ago where I cautioned him or her about Armstrong

And yet I have moved on while you've stayed and still insist he has some value:

Sorry guys, I had good intentions but after looking at him for a long time it seems this guy is a clever charlatan. He's collinearity with SOTT content comes from zerohedge materials and it seems it was deliberately used to attract people to his services, meanwhile he cant admit to his mistakes.
Thread to be closed.

On the side note for Administrators regarding linked thread - it's a pitty that private posts were cut and pasted to a public thread without prior notice, especially that they've contained a request to not copy information elsewhere.

 

[Lui Bunting]

What I find ironic and interesting is that Kosma and I had an exchange about Armstrong over 5 years ago where I cautioned him or her about Armstrong. This exchange actually made me realize that I hadn’t really done any true due diligence on Armstrong in terms of an adequate review of what he was saying and had been saying. I had for many years mostly let what others had said about him and were saying about Armstrong influence my perspective, even though many years earlier had looked at the reports he was producing from prison.

I see what you are saying. But this is not reflected in your previous messages in this thread, such as your Aug 29, 2025 statement:

"I'd like to attend one of his conferences. He also has online viewing of them. I think the next one is fairly soon and I think I'm traveling during it. I think he is legit and seeing the people there, etc would go a long way to settle questions about him."

In the next message you wrote:

"The other day I saw that this documentary on Armstrong become available on Youtube. I have yet to watch it, but for a long time I don't think it was easily available to watch. The Forecaster 2 is supposed to be coming out at some point and Armstrong says that a major motion picture movie is supposed to be in the works about him and his work, possibly similar in style to the movie 'The Big Short'."

You read on Armstrong's site that "The Forecaster 2 is supposed to be coming out at some point". On Sep 9, 2025, Armstrong wrote that it would be coming out in a few weeks. Didn't happen. I can guarantee that nothing noteworthy will ever come out because nobody in the real movie industry except people like Gangster Architect Marcus Vetter will ever touch Armstrong.

I suggest that you inform yourself about who Armstrong really is, using his Wikipedia article and armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com. There are really no other trustworthy and exhaustive sites about Armstrong.

 

[Aeneas]

I can say with certainty that Armstrong is represented here in this thread. It could be Armstrong himself or an intermediary.

It that is so, you need to look no further than the mirror. You joined in July 2025 and have made 12 posts. 11 of those posts are in this thread about Armstrong. The only other post you made was a kind of intro and the topic of that post was all about Armstrong and your blog about Armstrong.

Hi all,

The reason I am here is quite random one might think, but interesting nevertheless.

I am the editor of the blog - let me grab the main page Armstrong Economics - The Scam Business Model Exposé
I was notified by referrer entries in my blog traffic when Kosma posted a link to it in: Martin Armstrong - why promote a scammer?
So I thought I should have a look over here.

So from your interactions so far, it is clear at least to me, that you have no clue what this forum is about and no interest in what we are doing. It is fine if you are obsessed with Armstrong and devoted your life to him. That is your choice but you might just concentrate on your own blog rather than bringing your singleminded about a person that most of here don't know or care about for that matter.

Armstrong is shilling for himself everywhere

Well it could appear that you too is actually just shilling for yourself by dropping links to your blog and articles. Nothing wrong with that per se, except that such activity is not wanted on this Forum.

ADDED: As I was called away before posting this, the number of posts is now 13 from Lui Bunting and all about Armstrong.

 

[Lui Bunting]

It is fine if you are obsessed with Armstrong and devoted your life to him. That is your choice but you might just concentrate on your own blog rather than bringing your singleminded about a person that most of here don't know or care about for that matter.

Well it could appear that you too is actually just shilling for yourself by dropping links to your blog and articles. Nothing wrong with that per se, except that such activity is not wanted on this Forum.

I have never posted info regarding my personal interest outside of this thread, so my posts are always on topic. To say that "most of here don't know or care about" is not true because I don't write to those who don't care about it, only to people in this thread which is about Armstrong's scams.

And what I am doing is crystal clear: I am running a public service which has zero business activity behind it. To say that dropping relevant links to my blog articles which are always on topic is "shilling for yourself" is ridiculous.

That what I do is not wanted sounds repressive to me. This is especially true because everyone can choose to ignore the links while without links, it would need to write walls of text to explain the complex inner workings of a decades old scam business. Links are efficient.

 

[Nienna]

@Lui Bunting let me clear something up for you so you no longer have to obsess about it. Mike is well-known by many of us here on this Forum, and we can say with absolute certainty that he is not Armstrong nor one of his lackeys. So anymore on that matter would be just you trying to be right when you are wrong.

 

[Kosma]

Mike is well-known by many of us here on this Forum, and we can say with absolute certainty that he is not Armstrong nor one of his lackeys.

That doesn't change the fact that he is doing M.A. a favour, consciously or unconsciously.

That is your choice but you might just concentrate on your own blog rather than bringing your singleminded about a person that most of here don't know or care about for that matter.

He made selflessly some effort to highlight a danger for anyone interested in this persona. So only the majority counts, not truth?

Well it could appear that you too is actually just shilling for yourself by dropping links to your blog and articles. Nothing wrong with that per se, except that such activity is not wanted on this Forum.

There were plenty of links posted on this forum on relevant matters - so for instance should we now nitpick those who related about Peterson?

On the side note for Administrators regarding linked thread - it's a pitty that private posts were cut and pasted to a public thread without prior notice, especially that they've contained a request to not copy information elsewhere.

Do private FOTCM Board members know that their posts from there can land anytime in public without any reason?

 

[Arwenn]

On the side note for Administrators regarding linked thread - it's a pitty that private posts were cut and pasted to a public thread without prior notice, especially that they've contained a request to not copy information elsewhere.

The Sandbox section of the forum is open to the public, which is the section where your post above and the relevant thread is, so please let us know which posts are private that have been copied and pasted.

 

[Kosma]

This post was the first one, originally posted on thread at private FOTCM board, not in sandbox section.

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/m-armstrong-on-economy.12426/#post-874237

So it will be nice if this one and all later posts in that thread can be removed.

 

[Aeneas]

This post was the first one, originally posted on thread at private FOTCM board, not in sandbox section.

That post is in the Sandbox subsection called "What is on your mind". That part is public. Here is a screen shot.

Do you have other threads which you feel were mistakenly in the public forum?

 

[Kosma]

The mistake is on your side, not mine. Seems you didn't track thread editions made by Administrators.

Here are some old links to original thread:

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/martin-a-armstrong-adam-smith-of-our-times.49043/#post-896047
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/martin-a-armstrong-adam-smith-of-our-times.49043/#lg=attachment38969&slide=0
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/martin-a-armstrong-adam-smith-of-our-times.49043/#lg=attachment37026&slide=0
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/martin-a-armstrong-adam-smith-of-our-times.49043/#post-874431
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/martin-a-armstrong-adam-smith-of-our-times.49043/#post-874309

And some screens from my browser history:

 

[Nienna]

That doesn't change the fact that he is doing M.A. a favour, consciously or unconsciously.

And that was not the purpose of my post.

 

[Lui Bunting]

Back a bit closer to the original idea of this thread.

Since I posted about the history of Armstrong's Socrates while back, I am re-posting the link because my work is now complete:

The History of Martin Armstrong's Socrates


In short, it's the story how Armstrong turned his $700 million loss machine into a new subscription product. The after-burner development of this subscription product ran in parallel with the production of Martin Armstrong The Forecaster The Movie

While for Armstrong, this combo was the perfect launch pad for his Fraud 2.0, the exposé of it is a perfect tool to achieve strategic dominance over Martin Armstrong's ideas in any social media setting.

Consider the archetype of the failed inventor:

Someone who pours years and fortunes into a groundbreaking idea—be it a perpetual motion machine or a foolproof economic predictor—only to face insurmountable losses. Trapped by sunk costs (both financial and emotional), they can't pivot to a normal life; their niche expertise becomes a cage.

Historically, this desperation breeds scams: Luring investors with tales of suppression, like "Big Oil buried my free-energy device" or "The elites don't want you to know this secret."

Armstrong's journey fits this mold uncannily—his Princeton Economics debacle as the initial flop, Socrates as the repackaged "miracle," and the movie as the glossy conspiracy wrapper, implying shadowy forces thwarted his genius.