Announcement

**Basil** · December 24, 2008, 11:04 AM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by metalman View Post

astrology is for assholes, wall street variety or otherwise.

I am an astrologer and an asshole, and I can assure you that there is no connection between the two.:cool:

**Jim Nickerson** · December 24, 2008, 11:19 AM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by Basil View Post

I am an astrologer and an asshole, and I can assure you that there is no connection between the two.:cool:

You are the second person on this thread to state "I am an astrologer." If I stated I am a dentist, it would imply that I make a living doing dentistry (in fact I was a dentist, but now I am retired).

Is your day job in astrology? If yes, what do you do to make a living?

**FRED** · December 24, 2008, 12:01 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by we_are_toast View Post

Clearly you are a Leo who was born when Jupiter was rising in Libra.

You're temper is short, with a low tolerance for those who value emotion above reason. Your friends are sometimes aloof when you show them charts of M2 and bank reserves.

The feeling of contempt for your fellow workers will soon be replaced by respect as they finally help you balance your checkbook.

2009 will bring hardship to your bank account, but you will be lucky in love.

Your employer is a great philanthropist, and will keep you employed.

The career change you have been thinking about will be fulfilled by the end of the year. Leaving the world of money behind for the hamster ranch in Montana will finally bring you contentment.

The charges of plagiarism filed by Jim Cramer will finally be resolved by summer.

You will be dissappointed once again as Larry Kudlow does not call you for an interview.

May your Pisces find an Aquarius and your Leo not get stung by a Scorpio, and have a great 2009.

I think I've just been mooned

**sn1p3r** · December 24, 2008, 12:29 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Free Armstrong!

**Basil** · December 24, 2008, 12:33 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by Jim Nickerson View Post

You are the second person on this thread to state "I am an astrologer." If I stated I am a dentist, it would imply that I make a living doing dentistry (in fact I was a dentist, but now I am retired).

Is your day job in astrology? If yes, what do you do to make a living?

Actually, I make my living engaged in the latter of the two things I claimed to be.

**Guest** · December 24, 2008, 12:44 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by $#* View Post

So, what iTulipers believe about stuff like this? Any other ideas or opinions?

This is just a tiny preamble to the mountain of data supporting the validity of Phi turn dates. These numbers along with Fibonacci numbers govern the turns in all the indexes echoing back to the January 2000 top. Now go argue with Mr. Robert McHugh about it. If you are yearning to "pick this bullshit apart" though, you may need to gird and hoist yourselves up, and do a little careful back testing to discern whether the Phi and Fibo number methodology employed here is scrupulously applied, rather than merely being a specious exercise of merely painting order over randomness.

Quite honestly, the degree of opinionation on this topic, coupled with the evident degree of misinformation whenever the "astrology" bogey-word creeps in, only highlights how off base most of the reflexive skeptics are. You have not done the due diligence yet guys. Forget "astrology". Start from another vantagepoint. Is there any underlying ORDER in the markets, and if so, WHY? It is already ascertained that there are very precise mathematical ratios in nature. Examine your skepticism, AKA "mental block" against any such phenomena existing in the ongoing groupthink which constitutes human commercial activity - the extent of the mathematical harmonics emerging may astound you. New frontiers to explore there fellas - for the genuinely inquiring ones, that is. ;)

Remember what Jesse Livermore said, about the markets being overwhelmingly a game of human psychology? What on earth are we to make of these multi century recurrent cycles then? They certainly seem to be expressing recurrent RATIOS at the macro level, don't they? Otherwise, why on earth would one call them "cycles" at all? We'd be reduced to squirming around doing intellectual contortions, trying to avoid recognising any pattern at all in their cyclicality!

Here are your clues for what to investigate $#*. You asked for a hint - you got it. (And I've got a big pile more of specific turn point and Phi ratio data for you to chew over but you'd do much better springing a few bucks and subscribing to this Phd's work to study it's validity.) BTW - These Phi turn lists are not "ginned up" after the fact. They are a compendium of all the calls he's made BEFORE the fact, in his regularly issued bulletins. Wow! Pretty neat trick, huh? Meanwhile, it is the lofty and suspiciously generic sounding dismissals posted on this page which come off sounding like "seat of the pants" in comparison to the minutely logged work of this analyst. I can assure you of this - you will have a lot to chew on dismantling the work of Mr. McHugh.

ROBERT MCHUGH - PHI MATE TURN DATES - LOGGED.jpg

DAYTRADERS ARE MYOPIC.gif

**Jim Nickerson** · December 24, 2008, 01:53 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by Lukester View Post

This is just a tiny preamble to the mountain of data supporting the validity of Phi turn dates. These numbers along with Fibonacci numbers govern the turns in all the indexes echoing back to the March 2000 top. Now go argue with Mr. Robert McHugh about it. If you are yearning to "pick this bullshit apart" though, you may need to gird and hoist yourselves up, and do a little careful back testing to discern whether the Phi and Fibo number methodology employed here is scrupulously applied, rather than merely being a specious exercise of merely painting order over randomness.

Quite honestly, the degree of opinionation on this topic, coupled with the evident degree of misinformation whenever the "astrology" bogey-word creeps in, only highlights how off base most of the reflexive skeptics are. You have not done the due diligence yet guys. Forget "astrology". Start from another vantagepoint. Is there any underlying ORDER in the markets, and if so, WHY? It is already ascertained that there are very precise mathematical ratios in nature. Examine your skepticism, AKA "mental block" against any such phenomena existing in the ongoing groupthink which constitutes human commercial activity - the extent of the mathematical harmonics emerging may astound you. New frontiers to explore there fellas - for the genuinely inquiring ones, that is. ;)

Remember what Jesse Livermore said, about the markets being overwhelmingly a game of human psychology? What on earth are we to make of these multi century recurrent cycles then? They certainly seem to be expressing recurrent RATIOS at the macro level, don't they? Otherwise, why on earth would one call them "cycles" at all? We'd be reduced to squirming around doing intellectual contortions, trying to avoid recognising any pattern at all in their cyclicality!

Here are your clues for what to investigate $#*. You asked for a hint - you got it. (And I've got a big pile more of specific turn point and Phi ratio data for you to chew over but you'd do much better springing a few bucks and subscribing to this Phd's work to study it's validity.) BTW - These Phi turn lists are not "ginned up" after the fact. They are a compendium of all the calls he's made BEFORE the fact, in his regularly issued bulletins. Wow! Pretty neat trick, huh? Meanwhile, it is the lofty and suspiciously generic sounding dismissals posted on this page which come off sounding like "seat of the pants" in comparison to the minutely logged work of this analyst. I can assure you of this - you will have a lot to chew on dismantling the work of Mr. McHugh.

[ATTACH]910[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]911[/ATTACH]

Luke, to me the problem with all such stuff as this is if it were anything approaching a "sure thing" why would a person such as McHugh or Bensimon, if I may throw him in, spend so much time working this stuff up and selling it?

If I had a map to riches that approached 80% reliablilty, I'll be damned if I would be selling it, and subjecting myself to all the hardships of running a business. I'd just follow the map and become immensely wealthy, if that were my goal.

EDIT: Plus McHugh and Bensimon are Elliot wave counters and numerologists (I believe that is the proper label for them) rather than astrologists.

**c1ue** · December 24, 2008, 02:36 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Lukester,

The problem with all these charts going back to umpteen when is that (one of) the assumption made is the data doesn't change.

But it does.

The DJI has had countless changes over the years - to ascribe some PHI or JUJU or some other crap to its behavior over the 100+ year span is complete crap.

Its like applying a numerological model to a female. How does such a model take in behavior such as having a baby?

DJI at start:

[edit] May 26, 1896

American Cotton Oil *	Distilling & Cattle Feeding *	North American *
American Sugar	General Electric Company *	Tennesse Coal & Iron *
American Tobacco *	Laclede Gas *	U.S. Leather (Preferred) *
Chicago Gas *	National Lead *	U.S. Rubber *

DJI just 3 years ago

[edit] November 21, 2005

3M Company	DuPont	J.P. Morgan Chase & Company
Alcoa Incorporated	Exxon Mobil Corporation	McDonald�s Corporation
Altria Group Incorporated	General Electric Company	Merck & Company, Incorporated
American Express Company	General Motors Corporation	Microsoft Corporation
American International Group Inc.	Hewlett-Packard Company	Pfizer Incorporated
AT&T Incorporated *	Home Depot Incorporated	Procter & Gamble Company
Boeing Company	Honeywell International Inc.	United Technologies Corporation
Caterpillar Incorporated	Intel Corporation	Verizon Communications Inc.
Citigroup Incorporated	International Business Machines	Wal-Mart Stores Incorporated
Coca-Cola Company	Johnson & Johnson	Walt Disney Company

DJI today

See any changes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori...strial_Average

**bart** · December 24, 2008, 03:13 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by c1ue View Post

Its like applying a numerological model to a female. How does such a model take in behavior such as having a baby?

It doesn't, and that's not a great example either. I can speak from decades of experience in saying that using an approx. 28 day numerical cycle does help in understanding the fairer sex... my point being that using any numerical or odd tool can help, assuming that it has some historical workability behind it.

Stating it another way, I don't have to understand how or why a computer or car or TV or any other tool works in order to use it or benefit by it.

As far as astrology and Bradley, or any other "out there" tool goes, some do work fairly well for a while as my own results can attest to... and almost all of them break eventually too.

And specifically on Bradley and his siderograph, it actually has called turns for quite some time at well over a 50/50 chance rate, and years in advance too. Those are actual and unquestionable facts and its no more complex than that - use it or pay attention to it or not.

**Spartacus** · December 24, 2008, 04:48 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by $#* View Post

So, what iTulipers believe about stuff like this?

Any other ideas or opinions?

It could be peak stupidity.

Then again, it could be dark pools and other such like betting on stupidity.

**Guest** · December 24, 2008, 09:11 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by bart View Post

And specifically on Bradley and his siderograph, it actually has called turns for quite some time at well over a 50/50 chance rate, and years in advance too. Those are actual and unquestionable facts and its no more complex than that - use it or pay attention to it or not.

'Zactly right. It's curious how many people's sense of rationalism becomes offended by an assertion such as that clusters of Phi numbers invariably can be A) identified beforehand, and B) can be tracked in the elapsed market action to have marked 90% ++ of ALL the turns in the markets. A good investigator could care less whether this "contravenes" a rational world where the law of chance is the ruler. He dumps all preconceptions and takes note of what he plainly observe. That there are quite observably, clusters of Phi ratios at given points which can be found in ADVANCE, and then they go on to match what the market did when it arrived at those points. It's important to avoid caricature, to gain understanding - they don't "predict prices". They DO manage quite well to predict when the TURNS arrive at highest probability windows.

When these logs then show the live market completing it's primary turns at right on the Phi clusters - what is this unprejudiced pbserver to conclude? Is it more astute of him to instantly conclude this all points toward garbage conclusions, so he should scuttle what he's just observed? Well - he has just confirmed that the market action is at least appearing to show every indication of actually turning at 90% of those Phi numbers. If he is an genuinely curious, as opposed to a bagful of predetermined opinionating, he could care less whether this contravenes textbook "rationalism". He keeps it really simple. He reads the logged data, and is forced to conclude, that the market turns at least on first inspection, are really falling a very high percentage of the time on the available Phi turn dates, rather than at random.

Of course it makes no sense to conventional understanding of the laws of chance. But the point is, you don't stop scrutinizing a striking anomaly just because of that.

Anyone scoffing at this who has not even mustered enough mild curiosity to take a closer look, has a credibility issue of their own to contend with - because merely scoffing constitutes a sloppy substitute for investigation. It's rendering an opinion before bothering to even check the data backing the assertion. A genuinely curious approach would not give a sh**t whether this contravened "rationalism". The only point is to ascertain whether Phi turn dates have, or don't have, any correlation to the markets! And if your position is that they don't - then evidence that in simple, incontrovertible terms. I'll retrieve a pile of these logs and post them.

You can look into it or choose instead to forget it. But if you find yourself getting irritable looking for a way to prove that the quite evident tight correlation between Phi and Fibonacci numbers and the major market turns is actually a specious illusion, that is a hint the observed correlation is not quite that easy to dismiss. I could frankly care less whether anyone else gives it a second glance. Genuine market curiosity is it's own reward.

**metalman** · December 25, 2008, 12:15 AM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by $#* View Post

So you believe godraz is an asshole?
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showpos...84&postcount=4

I don't think it's OK to insult other iTulipers whenever you have a temper tantrum. Being rude is not a substitute to hide behind when you have nothing intelligent to say but can't keep your mouth shut.

Really metalman, can you please stop trolling my threads? Have I ever trolled your threads at "Metalman's Comments" and bring into off-toppic your great subjects of disccussion? Why don't you start a parralel thread there entitled "Astrology is for assholes"? (if Fred allows you to insult other iTulipers on this forum)

Now people may prefer not to participate in the discussion of this subject, fearing they may be subject to cheap sarcastic fits thrown by a hysterical primadona with an oversized and narcisitic ego. Can you please stop?

got my animal pics censored but so far my 'astrology is for assholes' stands.

never said 'so-and-so is an asshole'. i'm not insulting anyone. godraz is not an asshole, so far as i can tell. not sure why you brought him up. i said astrology is for assholes... that is, if you are an asshole, astrology is for you... you will like astrology. it is for you as 'buy and hold' is for you, if you are an asshole. but that does not mean that if you like astrology you are an asshole anymore than if you like to eat plastic spoons you are an asshole, although the eating of plastic spoons appeals to assholes, if you follow my logic. but then i don't know godraz personally and, anyhow, it's not my place to say, unless asked, and even then i'd have to consider the pluses and minuses of it.

are you indirectly asking if i think you are an asshole? just trying to read between the lines, here... speculating. maybe i'm way off here. if so i'd have to think about it. i'm not sure i'd want to answer. what's in it for me to tell you whether or not you are an asshole? i don't see the upside for myself. if i let you know that you are... and maybe i'm not the first person to tell you that... then your feelings might get hurt. on the other hand if i say you are not then there can be those here i respect who disagree who will then think 'hey, how can metalman say that? what's he a dimwit?' in which case my credibility is not improved.

you put me in a corner and the only way out, as far as i can tell, is to not answer the question... that is, if you are asking it... and instead let the evidence speak.

btw, one of these days a treasury bond auction will fail.

**bart** · December 25, 2008, 01:04 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by Lukester View Post

'Zactly right. It's curious how many people's sense of rationalism becomes offended by an assertion such as that clusters of Phi numbers invariably can be A) identified beforehand, and B) can be tracked in the elapsed market action to have marked 90% ++ of ALL the turns in the markets. A good investigator could care less whether this "contravenes" a rational world where the law of chance is the ruler. He dumps all preconceptions and takes note of what he plainly observe. That there are quite observably, clusters of Phi ratios at given points which can be found in ADVANCE, and then they go on to match what the market did when it arrived at those points. It's important to avoid caricature, to gain understanding - they don't "predict prices". They DO manage quite well to predict when the TURNS arrive at highest probability windows.

I'm not as familiar as I'd like with the actual track record of Phi numbers and also question that 90% call item (we don't know how many misses there were for example), but the study and use of "out there" stuff does work for me... and I never ever use only one tool and also always use mostly predetermined stops to limit my risk.

Here's the raw factual Bradley siderograph data from 2000-2010 so that any with interest or curiosity can just plain look and judge for themselves about one astrological tool.

**Guest** · December 25, 2008, 04:24 PM

Re: Astrology and markets

Here's an outline of what Robert McHugh has put forward, and a point which skeptics need to consider extremely carefully and soberly. McHugh deciphers "reciprocal" Fibonacci and Phi ratios between all primary and secondary tops and bottoms in the market since Jan. 2000. Close to 100% of them find a reciprocal within this five year span of time. Now the statisticians among this community (C1ue, one of the most hard boiled and stubborn among them) may or may not wish to recognize, that for Phi and Fibonacci numbers to be overlaid onto this market history and exhibit a random relationship to that five years, the Fibo / Phi numbers would have to appear AT RANDOM across that market plot.

Randomness precludes their appearing at ALL the high points and low points. I would enjoy reading a calculation of the statistical odds that within 50 odd unique secondary tops and bottoms, ALL of them find a Phi / Fibo match within another secondary top or bottom. This is where the hidebound dogmatists about the "inviolability of the laws of chance" start acting all irritated. This is also where the most inquiring minds get intrigued. It's also my opinion at the behavioral level, when confronting this little conundrum, that the lack of an intrigued response from certain quarters is a function of a dogmatic mindset. In other words, personality traits come to the fore when "axioms" are challenged.

FIBONACCI PHI MATE TURN DATES - by Robert McHugh, Ph.D.

February 13, 2006

It is important to understand that markets — and especially equity markets — seek order. The order they seek often falls into neat, precise Fibonacci Ratio time and price intervals. In the charts we annotate each week, we often point out price retracements and advances that proceed, stop, and turn at precise Fibonacci Ratios in relation to prior price movements. What we have noted to be true, is that price trend tops, bottoms, and reversals also occur very often at precise Fibonacci time intervals with other turn dates.

About two years ago, we took notice that when the Dow Industrials ended their two-decade Bull Market on January 14, 2000, something spectacular occurred. ... What is so special about January 14th, 2000? The Dow Jones Industrial Average topped then, six years ago, but so what? Yes, it can be said that January 14, 2000 marked the official start of primary Dow Theory Bear market. Again, what’s the big deal?

Since this dramatic date, every single market top or bottom of measurable significance has occurred precisely in a Fibonacci .618 to .382 ratio of trading days from either that starting date 1/14/00, or another top or bottom that has occurred since 1/14/2000, based upon closing balances. A mathematical formula has been 100 percent correct in predicting market tops or bottoms in the Dow Industrials since the Dow Theory Bear began on January 14th, 2000! Each, an exact Fibonacci ratio number of trading days from the Bear’s start and from another top or bottom during that Bear. And the trend continues.

Here is an example of what we are talking about. October 9th, 2002’s low for the Bear market came 687 trading days from the start of the Bear on January 14th 2000. This number of trading days happens to be essentially 61.8 percent of the number of trading days from 1/14/00 to a significant Bear market top, June 23, 2004’s top, which occurred 1,115 trading days from 1/14/00. The ratio 687 to 1,115 essentially equals .618 — phi.

Here’s another example. September 6th, 2000’s top is 162 trading days from 1/14/00. September 21st, 2001’s bottom is 423 trading days from the start of the Bear, 1/14/00. The ratio of 162 to 423 is a Fibonacci 1.0 minus phi, or .382. Again, let me repeat, there is a either a .382 or .618 ratio relationship for every single meaningful top or bottom since January 14th, 2000 with another top or bottom since January 14th, 2000. The chart ... chronicles every major top and bottom since 1/14/2000 and identifies each’s phi mate, the other top or bottom that it shares a .382 or .618 ratio number of trading days relationship with.

What is fascinating is that in the early going, these Fibonacci phi ratios might be off a few thousandths of a percent here or there, but the further out from January 14th, 2000, the more precise the ratios got, often hitting .382 or .618 right on the nose. This log of phi mates chronicles the amazing Fibonacci pattern that earmarks the current Dow Theory Bear market as something unusual in the making, a Bear market of particular significance in the annals of market history. (Below) we list 31 tops and bottoms since 1/14/2000 that have a phi mate. 31 pairs over a five-year period. I’m sorry, but this is not a random occurrence. This is nothing short of bizarre.

There is no logical explanation for it from a human perspective. It is not coincidence. I would love for one of my University mathematics professor subscribers with the time and interest to calculate the probability that all 30 consecutive pairs of tops and bottoms could be random. How’s that for an article my fine-feathered Ph.D. friends? Do the calculation and I’ll give you credit, be delighted to include the article in my Guest Articles section. Based upon the assumption that this Fibonacci phi relationship formula between tops and bottoms since January 14, 2000 will continue, we have calculated the probable turn dates for 2006, including minor as well as major prior tops and bottoms as mates.

It should be understood that since the dates we are now projecting are so far out from January 14, 2000, that dates that hit the .382 or .618 timeframes can vary by plus or minus 1 to 5 days. In other words, if we say 2/24/06 is a likely turn date, it means that 2/21/06 to 3/1/06 also may calculate to a phi mate approximate .382/.618 ratio.

* 3/7/2000’s low is 38.0% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/2000’s High to 5/26/2000’s Low

* 5/26/2000’s Low is 38.0% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 12/20/00’s Low

* 9/6/2000’s High is 38.3% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 9/21/01’s Low

*10/18/2000’s Low is 38.8% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 1/4/02’s High

* 11/6/2000’s High is 37.6% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 3/19/02’s High

* 11/22/2000’s Low is 37.9% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 4/29/02’s Low

* 12/5/2000’s High is 38.7% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 5/14/02’s High

* 1/3/2001’s High is 37.6% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 8/22/02’s High

* 3/22/2001’s High is 37.9% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 3/11/03’s Low

* 5/21/2001’s High is 62.6% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 3/19/02’s High

* 9/5/2001’s High is 38.0% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 5/17/04’s Low

* 9/21/2001’s Low is 61.6% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 10/9/02’s Low

* 1/4/2002’s High is 61.5% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 3/31/03’s Low

* 3/19/2002’s High is 63.4% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 6/17/03’s High

* 7/23/2002’s Low is 61.7% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 2/11/04’s High

* 8/22/2002’s High is 62.1% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 3/24/04’s Low

* 10/9/2002’s Low is 61.6% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 6/23/04’s Low

* 11/6/2002’s Top is 61.5% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 8/12/04’s Low

* 11/27/02’s High is 61.8% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 9/7/04’s High

* 12/27/02’s Low is 61.8% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 10/25/04’s Low

* 1/14/03’s High is 61.8% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 11/18/04’s Minor Top

*12/5/01’s Minor High is 38.2% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 12/28/04’s High

* 12/14/01’s Low is 38.2% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 1/24/2005’s Low.

* 1/4/02’s Major Top is 38.3 % of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 3/4/05’s Top.

* 1/29/02’s Low is 38.6% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 4/20/05’s Low.

* 6/17/03’s Top is 61.7% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 7/28/05’s High.

* 3/19/02’s High is 38.2% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 9/12/05’s High.

* 3/19/02’s High is 37.5% (Fib 3/8ths) of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00 to 10/21/05’s Low.

*4/29/02’s Low is 38.2% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 12/30/05’s Low.

* 9/30/03’s Minor Low is 61.8% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 1/11/2006’s High.

* 10/14/03’s Minor Top is 61.8% of the total # of trading days from 1/14/00’s High to 2/7/2006’s Low.

1/11/2006’s Top: In issue 259 we noted the next turn is due on or within a day or so of January 12th, 2006. In fact, a closing top was reached on January 11th, 2006 and equities sold off hard for the first time in 2006 on January 12th. 1/11/2006 was 1,507 trading days from the Dow Industrial’s all-time top of 1/14/2000. Its phi mate is 9/30/03’s bottom, which came 932 trading days from the 1/14/00 all-time top.

1/11/2006 is 575 trading days away from 9/30/03. 932/1,507 = .618, and 575/1,507 = .382.

2/7/2006’s Low: In issue 266 we noted the next turn is due on or within a day or so of February 6th, 2006. In fact, a minor closing bottom was reached on February 7th, 2006, at 10,749.76. February 7th is 1,525 trading days from January 14th, 2000 and is 583 trading days from October 14th, 2003’s minor top — which is 942 trading days from 1/14/00. 942/1,525 = .618 and 583/1,525 = .382 — on the nose.

For those of you bothered that some of these turn dates calculate extremely close, but not exactly as .382/.618 ratios, let me say this. In the overall scheme of what we are talking about here, a few thousandths of a percentage point is non-consequential, especially considering the end-point is to be able to project future market turn dates. But if you need a better explanation, perhaps this: Phi/phi is not really a ratio. It is a number that has no end. Its decimals continue forever — infinity.If you were ever wondering if you could come close to infinity, well numbers like pi and phi are close examples of eternity.

Divide the Fibonacci numbers 13 by 34, or 21 by 34 (note: 13 + 21 = 34). You come close to .382 and .618 ratios, but never quite get exactly there. .618 is a reasonable approximation of phi. Here’s something else interesting. Phiis the value 1.618 whereas phi is the value .618. If you multiply Phi by phi you get the value 1.0. This is truly an amazing number.

____________________

Robert McHugh - brief BIO and remarks in recent interview with Jay Taylor :

J. Taylor Interviews Dr. Robert McHugh - Dec 18, 2008

Dr. Robert McHugh, was once a banker before he became a newsletter writer. Robert founded a local community bank in Eastern Pennsylvania that ultimately became known as Main Street Bancorp. Talk about a "ground floor" opportunity; as one of the founders of the bank, Robert was one of 13 employees when it started. From zero deposits, the bank grew to $3 billion in deposits and had 500 employees when management chose to sell out in 2000 because they believed the economy looked like it was ready to head south.

McHugh was the second ranking member of management. He was an executive vice president and he was also the company's CFO. So he was responsible for funding the bank's portfolio. He also was involved in managing the investment portfolio of the bank. It was at that time that he gained a great interest in technical analysis, which he used as an investment tool. So, when the bank was sold and Robert had plenty of time on his hands, he decided to really dig into technical analysis by returning to school and acquiring his Ph.D. in that field.

TAYLOR: Could I get you to comment on the phi mate turn date? That is a very important tool that has been very accurate from what I understand. Could you just comment on that briefly?

McHUGH: Sure. We came across a cycle pattern that is fascinating. We have discovered that, since the January 14, 2000 top in the industrials, most of the tops and bottoms since then have occurred a Fibonacci number of trading days from that date to another top or bottom since then. It has a phi relationship. Phi is the value .618, which is kind of like pi, it goes to infinity, but we round it off to .618. It is known as phi. It is not a random number, most of the physical world we live in, the science of it, is earmarked by phi relationships.

Note: For those readers who would like to find an excellent definition and explanation of phi and gain anunderstanding of the many places in nature where the "golden ratio" exits, please visit the Golden Number web site at: http://goldennumber.net/neophite.htm

... ... ...

McHUGH: That's why I am telling everybody to raise cash here.

TAYLOR: If we start to hyper inflate and is that what you think is likely to happen here?

McHUGH: Yes, it has to happen.

TAYLOR: They are going to hyper inflate, the Treasury is going to have to buy the debt because certainly Americans don't have the money to buy it.

McHUGH: No, that's the problem. The Fed and Treasury are going to have to do it all. If they let this thing go down the drain, if they don't do something aggressive for the American Household, to rebuild the grassroots now, the Fed and the government will have to devalue the dollar anyway. It will almost have to be an official devaluation. They will have to buy out all of the debt with lower, cheaper dollars. And I am not sure what is going to be left standing when that happens. People are going to be crying and screaming for government protection and for government solutions and that is how you slip into totalitarianism. That's how you slip into socialism. That's how you slip into fascism. That's the danger here, if the American household is not fixed now, before it is too late, when we get to the bottom of this Grand Super Cycle, they will be screaming for a new political structure just like they did in Germany. That is how Adolf Hitler rose to power. This is how the dictators of history have risen to power. And that is a danger.

TAYLOR: Right, ... so ... we are looking at the possibility of a major increase in interest rates. Could one make some money shorting the long bond somewhere along the line here?

McHUGH: Maybe that will happen, but my own personal opinion is that I don't think the Fed will let interest rates rise on the long bond. They will buy them all up if they have to first.

TAYLOR: So, they will keep the interest rates down and that means buying them at an accelerated rate as time goes on.

McHUGH: What will happen is that the Federal Reserve will print money out of thin air, go into the market and buy up all of the United States Treasury debt. All the debt will be held by the Fed and money, dollars, that will be worth a lot less, it's a form of devaluation of the dollar, will float into the government and into the economy. What happens is, that creates a hyperinflation and keeps interest rates down at the same time.

TAYLOR: Well, John Walter Williams, the economist, had been strongly suggesting a hyperinflationary scenario by 2010, but given recent developments, has moved that up to as early as 2009. That, in a way would dovetail with your scenario of a very rapid unwinding of this Grand Super Cycle, would it not?

McHUGH: If that is the case, that means we are having an accelerated event and that's right, it would be a shorter term thing.

TAYLOR: I think it is remarkable Robert, that these insights come from an ex-banker. I just pass that along to my readers because most bankers wouldn't think that way.

McHUGH: Well, I'm a renegade banker. I have sat in at meetings where the Federal Reserve came in, sat down and said "stop lending, we think there is a recession coming." The very fact that we were told to stop lending caused a recession. That happened in 1990-1991. Word of that finally hit the mainstream media and one of the first acts Clinton did was that he grabbed the regulators by the throats and said, "why don't you let the bankers start lending again." The next time they came in, they told us to start lending.

They have that kind of power. They decide when recessions and depressions happen. They decide when hyperinflation happens.
They can do it through a lot of different tools. The hidden one is the regulatory agencies where they come in and intimidate bankers and tell them what to do. They have a lot of power. They can have the boards of directors of banks thrown in jail. They can have people fired. They use those powers behind the scenes, nobody knows about them. As a banker, I have seen the dark side of the Fed. I have watched them rate good loans as bad loans, and charge off loans when in fact, customers were fine, the loans were fine. We are in a bit of that environment again now. What happens is, the last thing these government agencies want to happen is that they get called on the carpet before Congress.

So they become overzealous, overcautious at precisely the wrong times. There is a lot of action by the Fed that messes with the normal business free market cycles that would prevent excesses. A lot of the publicity in today's market is that there wasn't enough government intervention, there wasn't enough regulation and that is true too, they got too far in one extreme, but they create imbalances and create these problems by overacting as well.

TAYLOR: Robert, while we are on this topic, I have to ask you about the Plunge Protection Team, or in more polite circles, known as the President's Working Group, which you talk about frequently in your newsletter. You have some way of measuring their activity. Could you just talk about that for a moment?

McHUGH: Yes, it's hysterical. I started to get into technical analysis to a large degree back around 2000. Prior to that, I was a user of technical analysis, when I managed money, millions and billions of dollars, and I appreciated it. When I got into it closely and started preparing a lot of it myself, instead of reading other people's work, I learned real quickly that there is manipulation in the markets. There are unexplainable moves that are outside the parameters of normal indicators, and normal things that work. I really saw it increase and intensify to a degree I had never seen before in the mid-2000s, I'd say about 2003 to even today. I researched the President's Working Group and sure enough, it is legal for the Federal Reserve or the Treasury or the SEC or the other members of this Working Group to authorize the purchases of stock, to authorize the purchases of futures, to manipulate stock markets, to manipulate bond markets.

They have the right to do this under the legislation that was passed right after the 1987 stock market crash.

From say 1987 to 2002, I just don't think that the PPT's actions were used to keep markets going up, up, up. They did it to stop major declines and prevent collapses. There were prudent opportunities to use it, to intervene, such as the LTCM hedge fund collapse and the Asian crisis in the late 90s. Those were appropriate uses for the Plunge Protection Team. What I noticed is that the market never went down after 2003. It never went down when it should. There were no corrections to speak of. There were months and months and months of straight up. Just when all of the indicators that you would normally be able to rely on, would anticipate a correction, nothing would happen, the correction would suddenly reverse.

TAYLOR: So, what we are really talking about here Robert, is the President's Working Group. That is directly from the Executive Branch of the United States Government, then?

McHUGH: Yes. There are no minutes to their meetings. There is no disclosure. There is no transcript. It is completely hidden. It was all circumstantial evidence. I would have e-mails from subscribers, from traders, from floor traders. The Working Group is allowed to use Goldman Sachs and a few of the other major investment banking groups to conduct their transactions for them. I had traders on the floor e-mail me saying, "our mystery buyer has ordered Goldman Sachs to buy the market." Sure enough, it turned it on a dime and the thing flew up. It got to the point, where the traders just followed this mystery buyer operating through Goldman and so on, to make a profit. I realized that at this time, we had an intensified degree of market manipulation throughout the middle of the first decade of the 21st century.

So I played around and found a proprietary indicator using data I can measure that can actually predict when it is probable, not guaranteed, but probable that government intervention into the market will occur, and approximately when it is probable that it won't. I have been using this tool for three or four years. It's called my plunge protection team indicator, my PPT Indicator. It has been astonishingly accurate at pin-pointing the environment and periods of time when markets are more likely to go up than go down and vice versa. Interestingly, the last six months or so, the PPT has not gotten heavily involved in jacking the markets up to the degree that I expected them too.

These indicators allowed for large periods of time where markets could slide, and in fact, they did. I don't know whether it was a change in philosophy or whether the selling pressure got so great that even the Working Group's (a.k.a., Plunge Protection Team) efforts were starting to fail.

... ... ...

TAYLOR: I thank you very much for that. Is there anything else ... any summary advice or remarks you might want to make?

McHUGH: No, it is one of those situations where you really have to do the risk analysis and say, "ok, we are in a potential situation that could be cataclysmic." There is potential, there is no guarantee. Play it safe, play it conservative, prepare, over prepare and if ... you are right, and the worst case scenario does occur, you will be glad to be able to function as a family with cash, with a new currency and a new regime established. It changes the rules and you can adapt to that.

_________________

And extract from a bulletin:

ROBERT MCHUGH - PHI TURN DATES - AN EXTRACT - 01.jpg

ROBERT MCHUGH - PHI TURN DATES - AN EXTRACT - 02.jpg

ROBERT MCHUGH - PHI TURN DATES - AN EXTRACT - 03.jpg

ROBERT MCHUGH - PHI TURN DATES - AN EXTRACT - 05.jpg

**Supercilious** · December 26, 2008, 01:45 AM

Re: Astrology and markets

Originally posted by bart View Post

but the study and use of "out there" stuff does work for me... and I never ever use only one tool and also always use mostly predetermined stops to limit my risk.

Here's the raw factual Bradley siderograph data from 2000-2010 so that any with interest or curiosity can just plain look and judge for themselves about one astrological tool.

Bart you are one of the "assholes" who writes posts that are always delight for me, regardless what misguided subject is discussed.

Thanks for pointing to the Bradley siderographs. This kind of stuff I'm looking for. I'm talking about correlation models between geocentric sidereal observable cycles and the evolution of the markets (especially with respect to timing).