let me also open with a well-defined hypothesis:
"Since there exist time-dependent autocorrelations in price data, past performance sometimes correlates with future results."
That's not a hypothesis. You have a premise "there exist autocorrelations", and then you restate that premise in the form of a definition. There is no inference/conclusion, so no hypothesis here.
evidence against TA would be evidence that time-dependent autocorrelations do not exist in price data.
Of course there exists time-dependent autocorrelations in price data. Why else would people be buying on speculation? Because there's an upward channel going up, a (highly correlated) time-dependent autocorrelation. Pretty much everybody here loves TA, I don't know who you are talking about by making a general address to "TA nay-sayers". You should qualify it by bearish TA nay-sayers.
do you see what i see?
I don't know, what do you see? Are you (again) calling the top, a reversal?