#NavinFluorine making steady progress @caniravkaria
#Navinfluorine above 2850, this one ready to head to 6200+ after a 4 month consolidation @caniravkaria pic.twitter.com/zJfcY8Uf3X
— Dare2Dream (@Dare2Dr10109801) February 26, 2021
More from Dare2Dream
#Metals All in one place#Sail \U0001f680 #TataSteel\U0001f680 #Vedl\U0001f6eb #Jswsteel\U0001f680\U0001f680 #Graphite\U0001f680 #Heg\U0001f680
— Dare2Dream (@Dare2Dr10109801) April 29, 2021
Very shortly I expect #Hindcopper as well, still at the launch pad. #Vedl #Hindalco yet to pick up pace.@caniravkaria https://t.co/eeOxZ7WWvo
More from Navinflourine
Double Top Buy triggered above 3704.66 daily close on 3% Box Size chart. https://t.co/b5KkTmtjl5
NAVINFLUOR
— Saket Reddy (@saketreddy) March 2, 2021
Double Top Buy above 2839.32 daily close on 3% Box Size Chart and Double Top Buy active on 1% Box size chart. https://t.co/HiLu17wobZ pic.twitter.com/6JIStAhaSO
#NavinFluorine A breakout above 3566, this one could head next to 4100/4200 levels. Long term levels have shared already. #Dare2DRM https://t.co/FvexrxG0T8 pic.twitter.com/DHYAiEZ1j9
— Dare2Dream (@Dare2Dr10109801) May 1, 2021
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?