#DRREDDY
Post the Harmonic reversal, Amongst the Pharma sector; #DRREDDY is 10% down.
Strong sell-off, There's a high probability of 4874.80 getting breached. Immediate support at 4700.20
#StockMarket https://t.co/J61wgJdzX7
#CNXPHARMA
— Gurleen (@GurleenKaur_19) July 27, 2021
Strong Breakdown but it continues to hold above a crucial support level of 14183.65
Support staying intact or A slip below this level would lead the Index either side. #StockMarket pic.twitter.com/qgBZKB4Cyo
More from Gurleen
6718.35📍
Three white soldiers with strong closing's one above the other.
The pattern target lies at 7200 levels.
#stockmarkets https://t.co/Pex4mVNKS5
#NAUKRI
— Gurleen (@GurleenKaur_19) August 18, 2021
Slow and gradual turn from down to sideways to up.
Might be offing for a breakout above 5640 towards 5800 followed by 6000. #StockMarket #StocksToWatch pic.twitter.com/3rAUGA7V99
Broken past the consolidation over again with excellent price volume action.
Harmonics in place along with a sequence of HL-HH and heading towards the target of Point D [5000] eventually.
#StockMarket #StocksToWatch https://t.co/kudBpwWUZD
#LTI
— Gurleen (@GurleenKaur_19) July 14, 2021
Strong positive move with above average volume almost after 4 weeks.
A breakout here would trigger 4242. #StockMarketindia #StocksToWatch pic.twitter.com/G0fWGyNhLT
Seems like another retest along with a follow through move. Even the support at 6100 has been taken out.
In swing support placed at 5590 followed by 4960.
#StockMarket #StocksToWatch https://t.co/bekQfLgWEK
#ULTRACEM
— Gurleen (@GurleenKaur_19) May 1, 2022
With the breakdown & retest. The major support is placed at 6100 levels. pic.twitter.com/IsoZd1grIx
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?