Over any one year, sure, even over a few years, sure, but when you see consistent winners over decades in numbers that exceed what random chance would expect, it's foolish to still insist the market is random other that it being a good way to sell books. I know what the book discusses, and the book is an unproven hypothesis, it doesn't need to be disproven as it has never been proven in the first place.

That markets are random is a hypothesis only; one lacking sufficient evidence to declare it a theory.

No one has proven markets are random and that's where the burden of proof lies.