The post Bitcoin vs Silver Crash: Expert Calls Out Peter Schiff Over Double Standards appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News
A sharp sell-off in silver has unexpectedly reignited one of crypto’s longest-running debates.
Finance expert and author Shanaka Anslem Perera‘s tweet is garnering attention after responding to comments from longtime Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff, who weighed in on silver’s sudden drop. Silver plunged as much as 14% in just over an hour, falling from $84 to $72 after CME margin hikes triggered forced liquidations and wiped out billions in leveraged positions.
Schiff’s conclusion was clear.
“Following a 14% silver correction, silver stocks are even better buys now.”
Perera’s response questioned why the same logic doesn’t apply to Bitcoin.
Same Market Mechanics, Different Judgment
In his tweet, Perera pointed out that Bitcoin’s recent 30% correction from all-time highs was driven by the same mechanics behind silver’s crash – leverage, margin calls, and forced liquidations.
Silver’s decline was treated as a buying opportunity. Bitcoin’s pullback, according to Schiff, was proof that it’s a “scam” and “going to zero.”
Perera asked a simple question: how can identical market behavior lead to such different verdicts?
A Long Record of Bitcoin Warnings
Perera backed his argument with history. He listed Schiff’s repeated Bitcoin criticisms over the years – from calling it a “fraud” at $5, “tulip mania” at $1,000, and “too expensive” at $3,800, to again labeling it a “scam” near $90,000.
The most pointed part of Perera’s “rant” focused on incentives.
He noted that SchiffGold accepts Bitcoin, Schiff’s son owns Bitcoin, and Schiff regularly speaks at Bitcoin conferences. At the same time, Schiff’s anti-Bitcoin posts generate far more engagement than his gold commentary.
“Bitcoin IS your marketing strategy.”
Crypto Community Reacts
The broader crypto community echoed the sentiment. One user wrote that Bitcoin outrage fuels visibility, while another said: Bitcoin “isn’t the target – it’s the engine.”
Perera’s critique didn’t try to prove Bitcoin’s value. Instead, it challenged whether the same rules are being applied across markets and that question is what’s keeping the debate alive.