Tuesday: Hili dialogue

June 3, 2025 • 6:45 am

Welcome to the Cruelest Day: Tuesday, in this case June 3, 2025. It’s also Chimborazo Day, celebrating the Ecuadorian mountain that has this distinction.

Chimborazo Day celebrates the spot on the Earth that is closest to the moon and farthest from the center of the Earth. Chimborazo is an inactive volcano that is in the Cordillera Occidental range of the Andes Mountains in central Ecuador, and has an elevation of 20,565 feet. Although Chimborazo has a lower elevation than Mt. Everest, because of its spot near the Equator it is the farthest from the Earth’s center and closest to the moon. The Earth is not a perfect sphere, but rather it is an oblate spheroid. The Equatorial diameter is larger than the Polar diameter, and Chimborazo lies close to the former. Being that it lies on this Equatorial bulge, it sticks about a mile and a half farther into space than Mt. Everest.

Here’s the mountain as seen from Riobamba in Ecuador (I’ve also seen it):

Eduardo Navas, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

It’s also National Egg Day, World Cider Day, and National Chocolate Macaroon Day (the good kind, not the overpriced macaron).

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the June 3 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*People in Boulder, Colorado, demonstrating peacefully for the Israeli hostages in Gaza, became the victims of a terrorist attack—a man with a flamethrower and Molotov cocktails.

A weekly demonstration in support of Israeli hostages erupted into chaos in Boulder, Colo., when a man using what was described as a “makeshift flamethrower” by officials attacked a group quietly marching down a pedestrian mall.

The group, a familiar one in Boulder, has walked through downtown regularly since late 2023, to remind the community of the hostages taken by Hamas in the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in Israel. They often wear red, speak the names of the hostages, and sometimes sing. And they agree to return the next Sunday, same time, same place.

That ritual was shattered when the man, later identified as Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, yelled “Free Palestine” and threw an incendiary device into the crowd, according to Mark Michalek, the F.B.I. special agent in charge. Within moments, smoke and screams filled the air. Victims fell to the ground. Others tried to put out flames with discarded clothes.

The incident intensified fears as the latest attack on the Jewish community in the United States, coming after two Israeli embassy employees were shot and killed last month outside an event at the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C., and the residence of Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania was burned by an arsonist. . . .

  • Suspect arrested: The suspect, Mr. Soliman, was taken into custody after witnesses pointed him out, the chief said. He was later booked on multiple charges in the Boulder County Jail.

  • Footage of the attack: Video verified by the news agency Storyful showed a man, shirtless and holding two bottles, shouting while bystanders helped injured people nearby. Patches of grass in front of the courthouse were on fire.

  • A peaceful gathering: The victims were participating in Run for Their Lives, a weekly event that has brought attention to the Israeli hostages being held in Gaza since the Thanksgiving after the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel. “Our walk has been nothing ever but peaceful, and this was a blatant act of antisemitism on the streets of Boulder,” said Rachel Amaru, a leader of the group.

Here’s a news video showing the perp, who faces multiple charges, including murder. Apparently he expected to die in the attack, but did not.

*Breaking (as of yesterday afternoon): The suspect, who has been charged with attempted murder, was in the U.S. illegally:

The suspect in the Boulder, Colo., attack on supporters of Israeli hostages in Gaza is an Egyptian citizen whose American tourist visa had expired, the Department of Homeland Security said on Monday. Investigators were delving into the background and motive of the suspect, who left eight people hospitalized with burns and other injuries.

The Boulder Police Department said that none of the victims had died in the attack.

The suspect, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, entered the United States from Egypt in August 2022 and stayed illegally after the visa expired in February 2023, said Tricia McLaughlin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security.

“The Colorado Terrorist attack suspect, Mohamed Soliman, is illegally in our country,” Ms. McLaughlin said in a post on social media. She added that he had filed for asylum in September 2022, but gave no additional details.

The attack, which the authorities said they were investigating as an act of terrorism, occurred on Sunday when a man used a “makeshift flamethrower” to attack people who were marching peacefully in support of Israeli hostages being held in Gaza, officials said. Mr. Soliman, 45, was taken into custody after witnesses identified him as the assailant, and was booked on multiple felony charges in the Boulder County Jail. He was due in court Monday at 1:30 p.m. local time.

Two of those injured were in serious condition on Sunday, officials said.

You can be sure that Kristi Noem will make a television commercial touting the illegal dalliance in the U.S., but as we know from the D.C. shooting, whether or not someone is here illegally isn’t the main factor in these antisemitic crimes.

*Iran, bent on having nuclear weapons, has said it’s rejecting the U.S. proposal to loosen sanctions in return for Iran not making bombs.

Iran is poised to reject a U.S. proposal to end a decades-old nuclear dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, dismissing it as a “non-starter” that fails to address Tehran’s interests or soften Washington’s stance on uranium enrichment.

“Iran is drafting a negative response to the U.S. proposal, which could be interpreted as a rejection of the U.S. offer,” the senior diplomat, who is close to Iran’s negotiating team, told Reuters.

The U.S. proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi, who was on a short visit to Tehran and has been mediating talks between Tehran and Washington.

After five rounds of discussions between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, several obstacles remain.

Among them are Iran’s rejection of a U.S. demand that it commit to scrapping uranium enrichment and its refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium – possible raw material for nuclear bombs.

Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

“In this proposal, the U.S. stance on enrichment on Iranian soil remains unchanged, and there is no clear explanation regarding the lifting of sanctions,” said the diplomat, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.

Araqchi said Tehran would formally respond to the proposal soon. The U.S. State Department declined to comment.

Tehran demands the immediate removal of all U.S.-imposed curbs that impair its oil-based economy. But the U.S. says nuclear-related sanctions should be removed in phases.

Dozens of institutions vital to Iran’s economy, including its central bank and national oil company, have been blacklisted since 2018 for, according to Washington, “supporting terrorism or weapons proliferation”.

Now why on earth would Iran want to keep enriching uranium beyond that needed for “peaceful purposes”? More important, why does anybody believe what this terrorist nation of Islamist lying autocrats say?  Well, if they reject the U.S. proposal, I’d say that the chance are better than even that Israel would be given the go-ahead by the U.S. to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, perhaps even in consort with the U.S., which has bombs big enough to do serious damage.  Why does Iran want a bomb so badly? Guess!!

*Greg Lukianoff’s new article in The Atlantic (archived) is called “Trump attacks threaten much more than Harvard“; the subtitle is “If the government succeeds in bullying the riches university into submission, what institutions will be safe?”

On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security stripped Harvard University of its Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, instantly jeopardizing the visas of nearly 6,800 international students—27 percent of the student body.

But the Trump administration’s attack didn’t end there. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s letter announcing this move also doubled as a request for documents, instructing Harvard to deliver five years of video or audio of “any protest activity involving a non-immigrant student,” plus disciplinary files, before the ban will be reconsidered.

The administration justified its actions by invoking Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the federal law that prohibits colleges and universities from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. However, the proper enforcement of Title VI requires an investigation, an attempt to negotiate a resolution, a formal hearing, and 30 days’ notice to Congress before a single dollar is yanked.

The Trump administration took none of those steps before announcing the intended outcome.

This is one among many reasons these moves are so egregious and unconstitutional. The government’s demand that Harvard turn over five years of footage of protests—a time frame that, tellingly, is not limited to the Gaza protests since October 7 that got out of control or involved illegal behavior—is one of the more chilling things I’ve seen in my almost-25-year career defending free expression on college campuses. These actions threaten not just Harvard, but every institution of higher education on American soil. That’s true regardless of your criticisms of Harvard, and I have plenty of those.

Lukianoff has criticized Harvard strongly, as he does here, saying that it’s an “intellectual monoculture” (true). Nevertheless. . .

However, it would be dishonest to pretend that the federal government just woke up one day and decided to target this university out of nowhere. That needs to be acknowledged, even if the Trump administration’s actions are still egregiously unconstitutional and present a real threat to academic freedom on all campuses.

The administration’s attack on academic freedom will not end with Harvard. Noem has already said that this should “serve as a warning to all universities and academic institutions.”

Fans of the Trump administration’s actions shrug at the stakes here. But they should remember that rights are indivisible: If the government can coerce the richest school in America without due process, it can crush a community college—or a civil-liberties nonprofit—without batting an eyelid.

This is the primary reason, if Harvard loses, the precedent that loss will set won’t stay in Cambridge. Republicans who cheer today should take a moment’s pause from their schadenfreude and recognize that they might lament tomorrow, when a different president decides that, say, Hillsdale College or a Southern Baptist seminary is “too extremist” to keep its tax-exempt status.

More than two decades of protecting free speech on college campuses has taught me many things, and one of them is that the sword is always double-edged. That’s why we need to fight its improper use, no matter which way it’s slicing.

Lukianoff is right, even though he fully realizes Harvard’s problems.  The University must not cave in to the government—as Columbia did.

*This is old-ish news but still ironic.  In an unprecedented move, Harvard revoked the tenure of a full professor of business, whose research—get this—was about people cheat and lie.  It was discovered that she manipulated data in her own papers, and that’s all she wrote. Literally.

Harvard Business School has revoked the tenure of Francesca Gino, once a star faculty member, after a lengthy university investigation that concluded she engaged in multiple instances of research misconduct. 

The penalty, confirmed by Harvard spokeswoman Sarah Kennedy-O’Reilly, is a rare termination in academia and ends Gino’s relationship with the school.

Tenure can be terminated only for cause or under extraordinary circumstances, according to the American Association of University Professors, an organization founded in 1915 that develops standards for higher education. Gino, who didn’t respond to requests for comment, is no longer listed on the Harvard Business School website.

Gino’s behavioral science studies examined topics like why people lie and cheat, and what factors, such as guilt, can influence behavior. She received tenure in 2014.

Harvard began to look into her work in 2021, after the trio of behavioral scientists behind the blog named Data Colada—Leif Nelson, Uri Simonsohn and Joe Simmons—scrutinized some of Gino’s work and flagged what they called irregularities in the data.

In June 2023, after completing its own probe and concluding that four papers Gino co-authored contained manipulated data, the university placed her on administrative leave and later began a review of her tenure. The probe had recommended she be fired.

Around the same time, the Data Colada bloggers published their criticisms of the four papers in a series of posts.

Three papers have since been retracted. The fourth had been retracted at the time it was reviewed by the Harvard investigation committee.

Gino sued the university and the bloggers in August 2023. She said Harvard’s investigation—led by three professors tapped by the school dean—was flawed as well as biased against her because of her gender, and that the Data Colada blog posts falsely accused her of fraud.

Gino’s defamation claims were dismissed in court, but her lawsuit against Harvard is still going on. Data Colada is a good organization.

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is patrolling her beat:

Hili: Who has knocked over the bench?
A: Probably the wind.
Hili: Naughty wind.
In Polish:
Hili: Kto tę ławkę przewrócił?
Ja: Pewnie wiatr.
Hili: Niegrzeczny wiatr.

*******************

From Barry:

From Meanwhile in Canada:

From Things with Faces, a cat with a demon on its coat (maybe it’s an AI image?):

From Malcolm: a chill cat:

From Luana; Khelif is discovered to be a biological male, as suspected. Will they take away his Olympic gold medal in women’s boxing?

And Human Rights Watch is apparently not for women’s rights:

From my feed; a jerk interrupting people at their meals:

A sore loser in chess. The NYT story says this:

Chess world champion Gukesh Dommaraju beat Magnus Carlsen in a classical match for the first time, causing the world No. 1 to slam the table in frustration at the Norway Chess 2025 event.

The pieces toppled over as Carlsen, widely regarded as one of chess’ greatest players, punched the table after realising defeat to the 19-year-old.

Carlsen had led much of the game but lost momentum after sacrificing his knight in a blunder. Dommaraju, the reigning world champion, looked in shock afterwards, calling the win “lucky” and said “99 out of 100 times I would lose,” according to Chess.com.

Carlsen shouted “oh my God” before apologising to the Indian teenager, who left the table to compose himself after the momentous win. As he walked out of the room, Carlsen then patted Dommaraju on the back.

One I reposted from the Auschwitz Memorial:

This French Jewish man lasted less than a month after arrival in Auschwitz.

— Jerry Coyne (@evolutionistrue.bsky.social) 2025-06-03T09:56:07.724Z

Two from Dr. Cobb. First, the eerie sounds of loons going wild:

VOLUME UP- these loons are absolutely bananas tonight

— Lauren in Saint Paul (@comobelladonna.bsky.social) 2025-06-01T03:23:21.818Z

And a hammerheaded fly. We have them in Drosophila, too, and the males use them when fighting head-to-head as a way of gauging body size.

WHERE MY FLY FREAKS AT!?🪰👀The Amazon is home to some WEIRD & WHACKY flies, such as this male Paragorgopis sp. 🌳Apart from looking like a hammerhead shark, we almost know nothing else about this genus of flies! There is still SO much to learn about the invertebrate world and it excites me so much!🤩

— Nick Volpe (@nvolpe.bsky.social) 2025-06-02T01:21:13.281Z

33 thoughts on “Tuesday: Hili dialogue”

  1. A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
    There is nothing more dangerous than a government of the many controlled by the few. -Lawrence Lessig, professor and political activist (b. 3 Jun 1961)

  2. Meanwhile in the UK, a Turkish atheist who burnt the Koran in a protest against Islam outside the Turkish embassy has been convicted of a criminal offence.

    The UK’s blashemy laws, originally written to protect Christianity, were abolished in 2008. They’ve now been reinstated by judicial fiat, this time to protect Islam.

    Judges should not be making laws like this. When amending the Public Order Act, Parliament added (Section 29J): “Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, …”. The judge has just ignored this.

    Such criminalsing of speech is becoming routine. E.g. from The Times today: “A right-wing YouTuber has been charged by police following complaints about a video attacking a Muslim councillor. […] [In the video he] accused Siddque of “fanning” racism by complaining that ethnic minorities were underrepresented, saying this was “bonkers”.” So any criticism of a Muslim that upsets them in any way can lead to you being prosecuted. Vance, we need you!

    1. Of course, I agree with you, Coel. Well, not about the Vance part, but the rest of it. This criminalization of anything that simply offends “certain” groups is wrong! Period. And shame on the judge for ignoring the law. Though, I’d also say, were I a cop in today’s world, I’d view the burning of a Qur’an in front of the Turkish Embassy as the god-damned last thing the UK needs right now. It’s just such an intentionally provokative location which, I realize, is the whole point for the Turkish atheist. I’m merely pleading for the use of a little common sense, better judgement in terms of how hot the times are worldwide. Ya know?

      1. It’s not the job of a cop to decide what to do. The cop is there to enforce the law, applying it equally to everyone. A huge problem in the UK now is two-tier Kier. It is LITERALLY the case that people are imprisoned for posting something on X (which was even deleted after a short time) but rapists don’t even get a prison sentence. Criminals are not deported because their children don’t speak the langauge of the country they would be deported to. Pedophiles aren’t deported because that would make it difficult for them in the country where they are deported to and so on.

        No, the mark of civilization is that all are equal before the law.

        The problem with criminalizing hate speech is defining it. If it is defined as speech which incites violence, then it is the people who choose to be violent who decide what can be said and what not—those should be the LAST people making such a decision.

        After the attack on Charlie Hebdo, the correct response would have been for every newspaper in the world to publish that cartoon on the front page every day until the insanity stops.

        1. Ok. That’s three of us who agree unequal enforcement of the law and any criminalization of so-called “blasphemous” acts is wrong.

  3. If you want to keep national politics out of universities, keep public money out. Then they just have to worry about donor and staff politics.

    1. Hillsdale keyed into this distinction once, bragging that they don’t take public funding.

  4. Ah, the highlight of Mt. Chimborazo suggested to check out photos of its summit views – interesting to see, I recommend.

    … A suggestion for the cat AI-or-not-AI is to ask grok right in the X app, something like “hey @grok, is the pattern on this cat AI?”….

    I might report back about that… beautiful pattern!….

  5. I love that the jerk moving from table to table is described as “self-impotent”

  6. … Aaaand I looked up the Gukesh v. Carlsen match, the final moves are shown clearly in this video :

    https://x.com/anandmahindra/status/1929531881743118775?s=46

    .. I do not understand the rules here, they are both way down material, Carlsen is black but the final king move surely can get out of check? Perhaps they were only allowed to go check-out-of-check so many times?

    I don’t see how the move is winning for Gukesh.

    This video shows more of the match with a post-match interview w/ Gukesh :

    https://x.com/alpakanya/status/1929280282907046092?s=46

    1. Carlsen resigned because white’s knight can stop both the black pawns from queening, whereas white’s h-pawn can just run down and become a queen. The position is thus an easy win for Gukesh.

      [And Carlsen wasn’t really being a “sore loser” he was just upset with himself — he had been playing very well and was close to winning, when he miscalculated and made a blunder that allowed accurate play by Gukesh to prevail.]

      1. +1 and +1

        …. is there a named rule that sets this limit? Perhaps depends on the venue/match level?

        I can understand if there was one king each, it’s a draw… but this is slightly different, like… “inevitable win for white”, or whatever…

        1. In chess a player typically resigns when they judge their position lost (rather than continuing until getting checkmated), but it’s up to the player whether and when to resign.

          2. Several situations: 1) neither side has insufficient power to force mate, 2) 50 moves without a piece being captured, 3) perpetual check, 4) no legal move but the king is not in check, 5) same position occurs three times. (One of those includes “and no pawn has moved”.). In practice, many are equivalent,.e.g. if I can put the opponent in perpetual check, then that can easily lead to 50 moves or the same position three times. In some cases one can claim a draw but doesn’t have to. For example, I might be theoretically capable of winning, but if I have a situation in which I can claim a draw then it might be better to do so and have a sure draw rather than a very probable loss. Obviously, in cases such as no legal move but the king is not in check the game can’t continue, and if neither side has suffient power then there is no point in continuing. Note: rules have changed over the years and might be slightly different even today depending on where one is playing, what sort of competition it is, and so on.

        2. Bryan, it was going to be mate in 12 or less no matter what Magnus did. He knew that. Gukesh knew that. Game over. Just one move earlier, there was still a chance for a draw in the unlikely event that Gukesh prematurely pushed his pawn to h6.

          It’s a wonder what a computer can say!

    2. There is a discussion of the whole game on Agadmator’s chess youtube channel.
      The bit you are querying starts (I think) around the 13 minute mark in the video.

      1. Awesome, thanks!

        Before, there was the Game of the Century.

        This was the Game of the Slammed Fist

        (It’s also a “meme”, it appears ..)

        1. Glad you enjoyed it!
          I view this guy’s channel on a regular basis. I think he’s Croatian, but his English is very good, and I find his commentary style enjoyable.

      2. A little late to the chess party, but:

        Carlsen was upset with himself for having squandered a winning advantage. As noted, he shook hands (briefly) with Gukesh, then patted him on the back on the way out. It’s nothing personal, but still a surprising show of poor sportsmanship. (I used to wait until I was out in the car to scream and pound on the steering wheel when I blew a won game).

        I wrote on my chess blog:

        “In the (final) position Carlsen resigned, if by “resigned” one means “slamming one’s hand on the board hard enough so that the pieces fall over.””

        https://chessmasterlarry.com/f/norway-2025-round-6-carlsen-crashes-vs-gukesh-tied-with-fabi

        1. Thanks Larry. As a mere 1800 (used to be about 2000 for a brief period, but now getting on a bit) I enjoyed your commentary.
          As for the “wrong-colour” bishop & rook pawn ending, I did know that, in fact that knowledge has gained me a couple of points or more in my career.
          Hope we aren’t flouting our Host’s rules here!

  7. So cute, that little kitten getting no response from the adult cat.

    And speaking of adults, Iran is trying to build a bomb. Let’s not ignore it, folks.

    Meanwhile, the attacks on Jews continue. How dare those colonialist oppressors walk in support of innocent hostages. The immolated range in age up to 88 years old. Very brave of you, Mr. Molotov.

    1. Call me cynical, but I’m anticipating some notable gun enthusiast (maybe even a cabinet secretary) to publicly oppose any tightening of restrictions on flamethrowers. “Now is not the time….”

      1. Better to tighten the restrictions on extremist immigrants from dysfunctional societies and leave the law-abiding owners of flamethrowers alone. But yes, it would be extraordinarily tone-deaf for the weapons-control advocates to call for banning flamethrowers as if that would be a solution. In events like this, the call-and-response ritual is the control advocates speak first, then the Constitutional crowd goes, “Now, now…”. (I don’t think you can own a real flamethrower, just as you can’t own a machine gun, an anti-tank rocket, or an anti-aircraft cannon. Some exceptions may apply…)

        I can tell you how to make an improvised flamethrower (but I’m not going to). If the attacker had used a real military flamethrower — an up-close-and-personal weapon no longer used by U.S. forces because soldiers captured with them were said to be tortured to death by the Japanese — there would be many more than eight bodies, mostly unidentifiable. On the other hand, if any of the event participants had been carrying, he’d be dead.

        Elderly people tolerate burns poorly. The two in hospital aren’t out of the woods yet.

    2. And did you read that one of the eight hospitalized victims is a Holocaust survivor? Man!

  8. There is a long, indeed centuries old, dishonorable history of poor sportsmanship on the part of chess masters. However in this case, I judge Carlson’s offense to be a small thing that should not be harshly criticized. Carlson’s outburst was momentary and then he quickly caught himself and apologized to Gukesh and congratulated him.

    1. Agreed. I was watching the tournament, and it was clear that Magnus was furious with himself for turning what looked to be a victory into certain defeat. The clip above doesn’t show him patting Gukesh on the shoulder, a gesture that appeared quite sincere. Gukesh himself later shrugged off the incident, saying that he had hit his share of tables during his career. I somehow find that hard to believe given his demeanor, but it was gracious.

      Carlsen will eventually need to wrestle with Father Time, along with his obvious boredom with classical games.

  9. Chimborazo was famously climbed by Humboldt and there is a biography of him The Invention of Nature by Andrea Wulf which should be good but I can’t confirm it yet since I just started reading it (starts promising). My only gripe with it is the subtitle that calls Humboldt “The Lost Hero of Science” which I find absurd but maybe I just live in a niche where I encounter his name far more often than average.

  10. Last night PBS started with the Colorado attack and IMMEDIATELY then put on some already debunked news about the terrible Zionists stomping more kittens and puppies and millions of babies in Gaza. The irony of “how could Colorado have happened? Where do people get these terrible ideas about Israel?”…was amazing.

    I’m sure they were too busy working on their affected pronunciation of “Ghaza” to note the irony. What evil clowns these people are.

    Ladies and gentlemen – our taxes at work: PBS.

    D.A.
    NYC

  11. How fascinating to learn all the facts you posted about Chimborazo Mountain/Volcano. Very interesting and I’m happy to know as much as I now do about it.

Comments are closed.