Viral Iran-War Forecaster Professor Jiang Also Discussed Bitcoin

Professor Jiang, the Beijing-based educator and commentator whose old lecture on a Trump return and a US-Iran war recently went viral, also previously made a separate set of claims about Bitcoin. 

Jiang Xueqin teaches in Beijing, graduated from Yale, and built an online following through his “Predictive History” channel. His profile has risen sharply after media outlets revisited his earlier Iran-war forecasts during the current conflict.

That new attention is now pulling viewers toward one of his more explosive arguments: that Bitcoin is not a grassroots invention at all, but a Pentagon-linked project built for surveillance and covert finance.

From Iran Forecasts to Bitcoin Firestorm

In an old video, Jiang argues that Bitcoin is “a construct of the American military of the Pentagon.” 

He goes further, claiming, “Bitcoin is designed as the ultimate surveillance technology,” and later calls it “the biggest scam out there.”

His case rests on four main points. First, he says Bitcoin’s anonymous origin raises obvious questions about who had the time, money, servers, and technical expertise to build it. 

Second, he points to DARPA’s role in early internet development as evidence that the US military has a history of releasing transformative technologies into civilian life. 

Third, he argues that Bitcoin’s transparent ledger makes it ideal for tracking behavior. Finally, he claims the CIA could use Bitcoin to finance covert activity worldwide.

Where Professor Jiang’s Bitcoin Theory Lands

Some parts of Jiang’s argument borrow from real history. DARPA did help lay the foundations of the modern internet through ARPANET.

But that does not make his Bitcoin conclusion credible.

Bitcoin’s original white paper was published in 2008 under the name Satoshi Nakamoto and described a peer-to-peer electronic cash system designed to avoid trusted third parties. 

No public evidence has tied its creation to DARPA, the Pentagon, or the CIA.

Jiang frames the question differently. In the video, he asks viewers to reconsider Bitcoin’s origin story, saying: “Who spent the resources and the time to build a blockchain? Who is financing the servers? Who has expertise in technology?”

His surveillance point is more complicated. Bitcoin is not private by default. Its blockchain is public, and that transparency has made it useful in criminal investigations. 

That is one reason law enforcement agencies and forensic firms can trace flows of funds across wallets.

Still, that is very different from proving Bitcoin was built as a Pentagon surveillance tool.

The Winklevoss Argument Falls Short

Jiang also cites the Winklevoss twins’ large Bitcoin bet after their Facebook settlement as supposed evidence that insiders knew what Bitcoin was “designed to do.” 

He describes their investment as suspicious, asking rhetorically: “Who the hell spends every single cent on something on an investment?”

That claim is speculative. Aggressive early investment does not prove prior knowledge of a state-backed plot. It only proves conviction, or risk tolerance.

That matters because Jiang’s Bitcoin thesis depends less on hard evidence than on inference. 

He asks the right kind of skeptical question: Who benefits from a transparent financial network? But then Jiang jumps to an answer he does not substantiate.

Separating Fact From Opinion

Jiang is going viral because one geopolitical call appears prescient. That does not automatically validate everything else he says.

His Bitcoin theory is provocative and easy to share. But based on the available evidence, it works better as a conspiracy narrative than as a verified explanation of Bitcoin’s origins.