Deepak nitrite
Explained you same concept with Elxsi. The real test of a strong Breakout is that the big hand will not give you another chance to buy the share at the breakout level. They will absorb all the selling of weak hands. I mean "STRONG breakout". https://t.co/7fxFqGQl3p

Tata Elxsi ---
— Steve Nison (@nison_steve) June 30, 2021
In the last 10 minutes, all the selling was absorbed despite intraday positions being squared off (if not converted). will wait for the EOD data. However, the chart structure is extremely strong. https://t.co/pci7GCDBEO pic.twitter.com/1NBD9V3mKc
More from Steve Nison
USDINR - a breakout that will not bode well for the equities
78+ https://t.co/AWqZxF5B1L

Can you anticipate a breakout? Yes
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@charts_zone) June 10, 2022
the attached tweet.
now the chart is for USDINR https://t.co/Vb2wKaCvTB pic.twitter.com/INo0GC4fGY
More from Deepaknitrate
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
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?