Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Simba who wrote (148188)	2/4/2002 2:43:19 AM
From: GraceZ	Respond to of 436258

I think there are more supporting scientific evidence than this interview. LOL....no chit. I was simply using this small section to show that the theories that Fama puts forth are not as accessible or as simple as the arguments that people put forth on SI against them. That neither the theory of random walk in the market or the efficient market thesis can be explained away with a couple of sentences in "plain" English. In order to have a discussion about it, you have to agree on a certain set of definitions the way that a mathematician or a physicist would agree on a precise common language. AND you have to know lots of stuff before you can even begin to understand either theory or how he is using the concept. Most people who argue against them are arguing against a common misconception about what one could conclude about the market using these two theories, thus they lack adequate understanding to critique them intelligently. Thankfully others with far more experience have argued successfully against both.