Quote from John Kuran:
So, what does this mean? We can't use DSP, Fast Fourier Transform or anything based on an assumption of a continuous price/time series (markets are discontinuous due to gap openings, price shock, etc.). Same thing for Arima, garch, VaR, CAPM, etc. Moving Averages are nothing more than low bandpass filters (DSP - Digital Signal Processing).
What we can do is seek out the point of temporary stability (trading ranges), monitor it for the onset of instability (breakouts / breakdowns) and trade accordingly.
What we can't do is predict prices. What we can do is look at current market conditions and look for changes in those conditions.
Markets are like weather systems. We can't predict with certainty what the weather will be like 3 years or 3 weeks out but we can do it for the next 3 days or so. We can't be precise in this prediction (ie, "the temp will be 84 degrees Fahrenheit at 2:54 pm EST on Friday") but we can be accurate if we keep it rough (ie, " a high pressure system is moving in, driving out the low pressure system that was responsible for the rain of the last 4 days. Expect sunshine with some clouds, temperatures in the 80s during the day, 60s at night, etc."). Same thing with the markets.
Thats a good post regarding the "physical" properties of the markets. And I largely agree with it at that level. But to some extent it ignores the "psychological" properties of the markets - that they are basically made up of large numbers of people interacting about their instantaneous perceptions of value.
That interaction and the fact that many use a mix of tools like trendlines, channels, and moving averages to build those perceptions mean that these "flawed" tools can be used to build effective technical trading systems. In my case, those tools add to the techniques you suggest to give a clearer perception of the likelihood of support, the likely direction of the next move and how I would detect that the probability had changed for the better or worse (from my perception if I had a trade on).

