Indeed. He's quite certain of himself and the theories he espouses. When they were running money for us, I got into several debates with him on the phone about this stuff. In the end, I came away from the experience with quite a lot of short-term losses, and a firm conviction that the clowns on Wall Street and in the finance industry only think they know math. When they get into a debate with someone who actually knows math, and asks to see the proofs of their theories... they find a way to get off the phone pretty quickly.

The thing that infuriates me is that the "efficient market hypothesis" (strong, middle or weak form) has been so conclusively disproven in market results, it isn't funny. And yet, people like Fisher continue to espouse it. In popular legend, it's the "random walk down Wall Street" nonsense. In fact, there are lots of things that are known by insiders that are profitable that aren't known to the public, and there are lots of things known to investors such as Buffett that aren't known to the general public. Both of these known unknowns result in excess alpha for those who know them - ergo, EMH is nonsense.