#Rolexrings
I'll go with 5th is getting done soon.
There is one more possibility that 3rd wave is sub-dividing !!
IF so it must hold last rise #retracement https://t.co/a6BBHIWrZk
ROLEX RINGS
— manav (@manav1418) June 24, 2022
Elliot counts (possible scenario's)
Which wave count is correct as per you\U0001f64f
please guide....!!@nakulvibhor @nishkumar1977 @JustNifty @piyushchaudhry @KrunallThakkar pic.twitter.com/h97J8Ycuf5
More from Van ilango (JustNifty)
Remembered it & made entry @ open for the "High rewarding 3rd wave"
Much appreciation🙏 to @ap_pune for his regular sharing of vital info. & wisdom from years of experience.
#auropharma "Hour t/f" for "Traders"
— Van Ilango (JustNifty) (@JustNifty) March 21, 2022
In search of the highly rewarding 2nd wave entry.
Today's & tomorrow's #priceaction would have more clarity for entry either @ 615-620 or above 655 https://t.co/20S0Lvc7ej pic.twitter.com/OFlf9MLkqz
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?