Evening Star on Copper Weekly. Though larger Trend stays intact, going forward, it would be better to stay on toes.

More from Piyush Chaudhry
Weekly Candles, so we still need to wait.
Earlier two tweets on Copper:
1. Copper - EM:
https://t.co/WogWRMIMHH
and,
2. Copper - Gold
https://t.co/Cq2zcn4bi3

Amazingly super positive correlation between Emerging Markets and Copper.
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) June 2, 2021
*MSCI Emerging Markets ETF #EEM
*Copper Futures #Comex pic.twitter.com/rVAwfqvqD4
New All Time High.
#HINDUNILVR

EW
Long Term Chart of the Month. #HINDUNILVR
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) December 9, 2020
Sometime in the next decade I see a fair possibility of stock reaching 7000 odd.
Invalidation below Blue Trendline. #ElliottWave pic.twitter.com/uxQrzt1mbj
as per relative strength
One question that I often get is which of the two: #HINDUNILVR or #ITC would be a better Investment bet. While their individual charts are clear themselves, another approach is ratio chart. IMHO Lever should outperform ITC for several years going forward.https://t.co/3AFqm6FJ1Q pic.twitter.com/rLuIm8xyVw
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) December 30, 2020
15 Months to this post. No change in the larger projections.
Long Term Chart of the Year.#NIFTY - Wave 5 (Cycle Degree) Target Zone of 25000-34000 by 2024-2027.
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) December 19, 2020
Reassessment on a breach below Blue Trendline. A breach is not a necessary invalidation. Depends on internals.
The dashed path is for representative purpose only. #ElliottWave pic.twitter.com/1xVY4OSr5T
More from Copper
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?