Archive for December, 2005

New Year Resolutions

It’s pretty simple. I got a couple resolutions I want to make:

1. procrastinate a lot less, which would give me time to…
2. have much more fun than the year of 2005!
3. and in addition to more fun, I resolve to have more varieties of fun. Throwing snowballs at girls in jacuzzis is one thing, I need more!
4. be happier, and try not to annoy other people
5. MAKE MORE EYE CONTACT! I never do. It makes me look suspicious, shy, unconfident, and just plain nervous. I’m going to stop avoiding eye contact even if it means staring at another’s eyes as if I got laser vision :P
… and before I forget, HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE! The year of the dog!

Comments (8)

What Internet Personality Are You?

elitist

You are a True Elitist. Not like those stupid ass 1337 Speakers, you are the best kind there is. You are irritated with bad spelling/puncuation/grammar and let it be known. You constantly find yourself ranting about things that irritate you and somehow people agree- even those who are the offenders! You probably have charisma coming out of your pores, but are way too elitist to just befriend -anyone-. You, my friend, rock.

Stolen from Rod. Elitist? o_O What the hell?

Comments (2)

My PSAT score

I decided to look over it and see what kind of questions I missed. Total score 209.

Critical Reading:
7 of 12 easy questions
21 of 24 medium questions
11 of 12 hard questions

3 of those easy ones were tone questions… And 1 more was from the Twain reading. Wow, I’m such a disappointment. I missed 9 total on reading, 5/9th of which are from easy questions…

Got a 62

Math:
Missed one “hard” one. For math I solve first, circle the answer, and transfer the answers over near the end. I guess I transferred #18 wrong o_O I circled it right too.

Got a 76

Writing:
13 of 16 easy questions
17 of 18 medium questions
5 of 5 hard questions

Answered incorrectly 4 questions and lost 1 point

Again, I think I got problems. I checked over what I missed, and I guess I didn’t see the mismatch of prepositions or plural/singular verb/nouns >_

Comments (5)

SCU Tournament

I figured I donated ~500 dollars to the class, so why not go to a tournament? I went to the Santa Clara University (which happens to be a private catholic university…) to speak in (mock) Congress. We spoke on six bills yesterday, and since I didn’t break to semifinals I don’t have to speak on the other 4 today.

What I believe contributed to me not breaking is probably the fact that I did not speak enough. There were six bills, but I only made a speech on two: Immigration and Intelligent Design. The problem is, whenever I stand up, I’m not called. The only reason I was called for the Immigration and Intelligent Design bill was because I was the only one standing - the first speaker of the two respective rounds.

Maybe it’s because I’m short - I can’t see the speaker of the house myself, how can she see me? Maybe my last name Yan is last in precedence - Everyone else’s last names were all alphabetically before mine. Or, maybe I totally alienated the Mexican speaker of the house and the fanatical judge.

Bill 1: Opening our borders to immigrants from all non-sanctioned nations

The immigration bill wasn’t all that interesting, but I’ll mention a few random things that happened. Since I was affirmative on this bill, and only 3 of the 15 were, I got to speak first - maybe the only reason I got to speak at all. Of the six bills, I spoke only on 2 of them. The two I spoke on, I spoke first, when nobody but I stood up - I could actually see the speaker of the house then! Other times when I wanted to speak, and stood up, I myself could not see the speaker. I think I’m short, and should’ve sat up front.

Anyway, during the bill, a speaker in the negation of the bill began with a metaphorical introduction: “One atom can set off a whole nuclear chain reaction; similarly…” and related that to our immigration topic. So, during cross-examination (Question-and-answer period), I asked “A nuclear fission reaction requires the high-velocity collision of two subcritical masses of nuclear fuel, not a single atom as you earlier stated in your speech, in order for the reaction to begin; in regards to your metaphorical introduction concerning that, do you truly believe one immigrant can have such a detrimental effect on the nation?” And everyone laughed at the randomness of that - hey, she brought it up. I only extended it.

For the rest of the session, until Bill 5, I just sat there and asked as many questions as the Speaker accepted. But anyway, onto bill 5.

Bill 5: Teaching Intelligent Design in all Public Primary & Secondary schools

It’s obvious what stance I took, right? Anyway, this was funnier because I got to go first, and got to make all my speech criticizing “intelligent design” and supporting evolution. I had essentially a Jonathan Edwards moment, except instead of scaring people about hell, I chastised the whole religious foundation on which intelligent design is based. I began with these words: “Human beings are endowed by birth with a natural ability to think and deduce logically.”

Afterwards I explained why this bill is completely illogical. I went through the 150+ year history of evolution, explained that it still holds true today, etc, and that intelligent design is “clearly a religious transcript modified for political gains.” I then concluded all that (since my 3 minutes were up already!) with these words: “As you can see, while religion has its foundations on the lack of evidence denying its existence, science has its foundations on the abundant presence of evidence buttressing its existence; it can clearly be seen that in order for our nation to remain on the cutting edge of the international science game, we MUST teach our youth correctly - an education based on concrete proof, not mere speculation. And thus I urge a negative vote on this bill. Thank you.”

I didn’t get to finish my speech because I was allotted only 3 minutes, so I wanted to speak again. I stood up every time a negative speech came up, but I was not chosen to speak for any more.

Oh well. That was fun while it lasted - I didn’t break to semis but that’s ok. I got Sunday off!

Comments

Love is a drug

Pop stars have been claiming love is a drug for years. Now, scientific research has proven them right.

Researchers have found evidence that the brain chemistry responsible for addiction also plays a role in love.

I thought god was a drug. I guess so is love, eh? We had a survey in english today of the school’s drug usage. How come I didn’t see “love” listed under the “Drugs used in the past year, month, week, day”? If we can get high off of both sources, why not? :P

Oh by the way, side effects of the drug known as “love” lasts one year:

Molecule gives passionate lovers just one year

ROME (Reuters) - Your heartbeat accelerates, you have butterflies in the stomach, you feel euphoric and a bit silly. It’s all part of falling passionately in love — and scientists now tell us the feeling won’t last more than a year.

Who would’ve thought, eh? One year side effect’s pretty long. The fact that it’s one year - and not longer - echoes Darwin’s principles.

Anyone notice “ROME”?

Comments (5)