COFORGE
Double Top Buy, T20 Pattern - Bullish & Super Pattern - Bullish above 5281.96 daily close on 3% Box size chart. https://t.co/Iib4z27kHh
COFORGE
— Saket Reddy (@saketreddy) May 11, 2021
Double Top Buy above 3426.76 daily close on 1% box size chart. https://t.co/geOoLAc5XU pic.twitter.com/jxuoAVefqi
More from Saket Reddy
Don't try bottom fishing and value buying as time correction can take away a lot of opportunity cost.
Just let it give a monthly or weekly close above ATH.
ABBOTINDIA
— Saket Reddy (@saketreddy) May 8, 2021
A breakout in the offing? pic.twitter.com/rnpcsQ616a
Double Top Buy & T20 Pattern - Bullish above 2189.89 daily close on 1% Box Size Chart. https://t.co/dEAqzILJj4
DEEPAKNTR
— Saket Reddy (@saketreddy) March 30, 2021
Double Top Buy & ABC Breakout above 1608.64 daily close on 1% Box size chart & Double Top Buy active on 3% Box size chart.
2000 Coming! https://t.co/ifywtsGM0S pic.twitter.com/VM7TneVwOr
Plotting sales CAGR for few gems in #chemicals, #pharma and #FMCG
— jeevan patwa (@jeevanpatwa) July 14, 2021
Majority has 20Y CAGR > 10Y > 5Y => growth is decelerating as base becomes big...
only outlier being #Deepaknitrate where
20Y CAGR < 10Y < 5Y => accelerating growth... pic.twitter.com/ewpFeKmxQo
More from Coforge
Double Top Buy above 3426.76 daily close on 1% box size chart. https://t.co/geOoLAc5XU
COFORGE
— Saket Reddy (@saketreddy) May 6, 2021
Triple Top Buy above 3196.21 daily close on 1% Box size chart & Double Top Buy above 3195.68 daily close on 3% Box size chart. https://t.co/RI62IqiBoL pic.twitter.com/jvTNSR7W7P
You May Also Like
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?