Anyway, AS module results from January exams (subjects listed in descending order of purity/awesome):

• Philosophy Unit 1: 100/100 – A (duh): Woo-hoo!
• Maths: Core 1: 97/100 – A;
• Maths: Mechanics 1: 86/100 – A: slightly fail, but probably only one question messed up, not worth resitting unless I desperately need marks next year. I think I was a bit slapdash (read: cocky) in preparing for Maths, to be honest.
• Maths: Statistics 1: 94/100 – A;
• Physics Unit 1: 120/120 – A: Woo-hoo again;
• Chemistry Unit 1: 97/100 – A.

I’ve also got 100/100 in Decision Maths 1 from last January. Pretty happy with those results, but I need to revise harder (read: at all outside lessons) for Maths in June.

I entered a poetry competition advertised at school with something I cooked up in half an hour, and amazingly they’re mad enough to want to publish it. (OK, so they don’t seem to be too selective and I have a feeling most of their business model is selling to proud parents).

Here it is, in all its dreadful glory:

I thunder as I debate: bankers,
And their bonuses; and bay for blood.
I sing The Red Flag,
Cry out for socialism
But in my heart
I’d rather keep the status quo.

My heart goes out to the starving
As I have a fourth bread roll.
I make excuses, or I try,
Say “It takes collective action”
But deep down I know
I’d really make a difference,
Going it alone.

I’ll vote for Labour
No matter what they do.
I say “It’s all we’ve got,
“the others are too small”
While a million think the same.

I am a champagne socialist.
I quaff my fizz with pride.
While all the time bemoaning
Deaths from African drought

I am an armchair activist,
I call for change
But like the way things are.
You are too, I know it,
So let me tell you now
If we do something, each of us,
We can get so far.

1. Keep a diary
I tried to do this last year, and I kept it for four or five months in total. I’d like to try again, and I’d like to try to keep it up for the whole year.

2. Blog more
Yeah. I tried to do this last year as well. Hopefully I’ll do a little better this year. I’m going to aim for a minimum one/month, but I’d like to try and do more.

3. Read some books
OK, so I already do quite a lot of this. But there are quite a few books I’d like to read, but need a bit of motivation to get started on, and I’d quite like to read some books I otherwise wouldn’t. I’ll post a partial list here, and I’ll keep an updated list as well, because I’m bound to think of others later.

• On Liberty, JS Mill;
• Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes;
• Paradise Lost, John Milton (at least try it);
• Catcher in the Rye, JD Salinger;
• Twilight, Stephenie Meyer (for teh lulz);

I’d also appreciate suggestions. If you comment below or otherwise contact me with a suggestion, and I can reasonably get hold of the book, I’ll make it a resolution to at least give every one a go.

There are fewer than last year, but hopefully I stand a better chance of keeping them. Hopefully.

Addendum, later that evening: As a corrolary to 2 and 3, I will try to review at least some of the more interesting books I am reading.

• Maths: A*, predicted A*;
• Statistics: A*, predicted A*;
• English Language: A*, predicted A*/maybe A;
• English Literature: A, A*/maybe A;
• Core Science: sat last year: A*;
• Additional Science: A*, predicted A*;
• History: A*, predicted A*;
• French: A*, predicted A*;
• German: A*, predicted A*;
• Food Tech: B (1 mark off A), predicted A*/A;
• RE: A*, predicted A*.

Overall I’m fairly happy with my results, and my predictions were somewhat optimistic, but the B in Food Tech is a bit disappointing.

• Maths: A*;
• Statistics: A*;
• English Language: A*/maybe A;
• English Literature: A*/maybe A;
• Core Science:  sat last year: A*;
• Additional Science: A*;
• History: A*;
• French: A*;
• German: A*;
• Food Tech: A*/A;
• RE: half sat last year, A*, would have predicted A* overall, fairly confident about A* having sat it yesterday.

It means a pure substance comprised of atoms or molecules. It is not a perjorative. Use “synthetic chemical”, “harmful chemical”, “dangerous chemical”, “carcinogenic chemical” (although the “-ic chemical” is redundant). Not just “chemical”. Water is a chemical*. Air is a mixture of chemicals. “Chemical” is not shorthand for “nasty industrial solvent”. Learn that.

*Dihydrogen monoxide is a good example of how easy it is to  scare people by using “chemicalish” names. Use the term “amino acid” in a non-scientific context and you’d probably have to explain they’re not like sulphuric acid. I won’t continue this rant onto standards of scientific education, but I could. So easily.

 [Note: this was sparked by a Food Tech mark scheme which allowed "don't use chemicals" (meaning artificial additives) as an answer. All food contains chemicals. All food is organic (contains carbon).]

The adversarial debating format is a great way to test who’s the better orator. Done well, it’s great theatre. But it isn’t efficient at producing original thought and ideas. Yes, some occasionally come out (by original I here mean points we as a group haven’t thought of yet, but the argument applies to true originality too), but I daresay they’d come out more often if we didn’t devote so much time to the lower-level points required of debating. Pragmatic points can be important in , say, parliamentary debate; but as a society which aspires to higher-level, philosophical thinking, why don’t we cut to the chase?

Another issue is that, while the large majority of us share essentially the same views, the format forces us to take opposite sides. Devil’s advocacy itself isn’t a problem, but combined with the requirement for stubborn tenacity and refusal to concede anything, it leads to dull, unoriginal ping-pong on points that would long ago have been conceded in an informal discussion.

Adversarial debate is bad enough in philosophical discussion, but in court it endangers justice. All too often, especially in jury trials, rather than those before harder-to-influence judges or magistrates, quality of advocacy takes importance which should be given solely to evidence. Top barristers don’t win more cases just because they know the law better – their success is due at least in part to the fact that they are better orators. I’m undecided on the French investigative magistrate system, but in this respect it has advantages – a judge is less swayed by oratory than a jury, and anyway more importance is given to the evidence than its presentation.

Adversarial debate has its purporses — in Parliament it is useful for bringing up the pragmatic points that need to be considered in lawmaking, and I have intentionally gone too far in my condemnation of the adversarial format in order to provoke discussion (I almost said debate). So comment, and tell me why I’m wrong, but do so constructively.

1. Keep a diary in my Moleskine
Moleskines are beautiful. I probably won’t live up to that with my scribblings, but they’ll be valuable to me in years to come. I look back on the half-dozen diary entries I have left from previous years and regret not having written more. I aim to write something for every day, written on that day if possible, the next if not.  A few more notes about my Moleskine seem to fit here nicely – I’ve followed the advice of a commenter on this wonderful page about moleskines and scribbled on the first page to prevent myself getting hung up on mistakes within – I’ve had it since a little before Christmas and not written in it before now (this blog post is a slightly modified version of my scribblings in it, as all will be in future – but more of that later.)

2. Blog more
I haven’t posted since August, and I want to change that, so I’m setting myself a target of one written-for-blog post a week. I’ll probably also post diary excerpts and maybe a few other things not written specifically for this here, but I want to have a proper post once a week. This one may fall by the wayside, but it’s worth a try, and unlike Sean I think my moleskine will help, not hinder, as I’m using it for drafting these and the joy of writing in a moleskine is a big temptation to do so.

3. Keep up with homework
I fell behind last year. I don’t want to go into details, but I got myself into a mess. I don’t want to repeat it, so this is pretty common-sense. It shouldn’t be hard, and hopefully setting it as a resolution will help me resist the temptation to procrastinate.

4. Walk more
I don’t walk as much as I’d like to, or as I used to (largely due to family not forcing me out on walks at weekends), so I’m setting myself a target of at least 1 one-hour walk per week. Even if it’s just into town (with a detour around the botanical gardens) it’ll do me some good and get me in the habit.

5. Get more involved with Amnesty
I’ve become almost apathetic when it comes to actually getting anything to do with Amnesty International done at school. I’ve accepted responsibility for organising our campaigns, and hopefully this will spur me on rather than giving me more wok to ignore.

6. Be productive with free lessons
I have five free lessons a fortnight, which all too often i use to catch up with feeds on Google Reader and check emails. I want to do something more. Whether it’s reading a book, writing or typing up a blog post, doing homework or working on D2, Google Reader can wait ’til after school.

There are probably others I haven’t thought of – I have the amazing ability to fail to remember even the most important moments of my day when I sit down to record them – but I’ll add them when i think of them. Resolutions don’t just have to be for new year.

I haven’t tried it, but I suspect that the process of making an installable copy is as simple as ignoring that notice and copying the contents of the CD. You don’t even need the disc in the drive to run it!

Oh, happy days. Now even the £5 Spore Creature Creator requires periodic online checking that you legal copy hasn’t somehow become pirated – although EA have said that they will remove that part from Spore itself (although online activation will still be required). This Penny Arcade on the subject is quite funny.

The government claim this is necessary to enable the police to gather complex evidence (decrypting hard drives and the like) in a hypothetical situation where the country is facing a series of attacks. Let me rephrase this: The government want it so they can keep terrorist suspects out of the way rather than having to make a proper case.

Stopping terrorism may seem like a noble cause, and of course it needs to be done, but the ends do not justify the means. In abandoning our principles of freedom and habeas corpus we defeat the point of stopping the terrorists: we do their dirty work of destroying our society for them.

The Director of Public Prosecutions (the person in charge of deciding whether there is sufficient evidence to charge) has said that 42 days is unnecessary. Almost everyone right across the political spectrum agrees with him, apart from the gesture-politics-mongers of New Labour. I hate to agree with John Major, but in this case I do. If anything, this will just help terrorists with their radicalisation: “Look, the government wants to lock us all up.” Quite frankly, in 42 days, they could probably find evidence that anyone had committed a “terrorist” offence – I possess a copy of Scouting for Boys – useful for terrorist training in reconnaissance – , and as for those holiday snaps of London…

It is not just the powers, and their destructive effect on an innocent person’s life that I hardly need mention, it is so obvious, but the way they may end up being used – to stop peaceful protest. We have already seen police using powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act to harrass protesters who they know full well are not terrorists. What happens when these poweres are similarly abused.

The powers may help slightly in gathering evidence, but the price we will pay for them is too great. Labour as a working majority of 60-odd. That means only 30 or so Labour MPs need defy the government and liberty will be protected.

Wednesday was spent looking around Keswick’s four or so decent gear shops (and avoiding the dozen or so rubbish touristy ones) in search of rock shoes for my mother. I also got a new pair of waterproof overtrousers, since the old ones were halfway up my shins, and my dad got a new pan which is supposed to be about a third quicker for boiling water, which is perhaps a little exaggerated, but not by a long way. (An aside to those of you who aren’t outdoors nuts. Boil time is an important factor in camping, since the longer it takes, the more fuel it uses, and fuel is heavy, so minimizing fuel use is important for lightweight camping. We fill a Ford Focus estate and roofbox when we go camping, so you couldn’t exactly call us lightweight, but faster tea in the mornings is a very good thing.)

On Thursday we climbed Helvellyn, the third (or second, depending on whether you count Scafell and Scafell Pike as the same mountain or not) highest mountain in the Lakes (and, since the lakes are the only serious mountain area, England). We climbed up Swirrel Edge (to the right as you look from Red Tarn) and down Striding Edge (to the left). The scrambling wasn’t hard, but at that sort of height, it doesn’t have to be to get a decent adrenalin rush. Swirrel Edge was great, but Striding Edge was very busy, longer than you’d like it to be, and easier, so it wasn’t as interesting.

We drove home on Thursday evening, stopping in Catterick to wait half an hour in a small chippie for greasy fish and chips – not the greatest meal out I’ve ever had.

All in all, a great holiday.

A little about me first. I’m a Year 10 secondary school pupil from the UK. I consider myself a geek, and my Geek Test score of 42.60355% suggests I’m entitled to do so. (Is it a sign of geekiness that I think a score that near to 42% should mean bonus points?)

I am a beginner bellringer, an activity which I very much enjoy, and an amateur astronomer, although I am far more interested in the physics than the actual observing.

I’m a keen Dungeons & Dragons player, and I am a DM for two groups at my school (and unfortunately not an actual player in any).

I am also an Explorer Scout, and I attended the World Scout Jamboree in 2007.

I am an atheist until proven otherwise, and politically I am a democratic liberal socialist, in that order of importance.

Hopefully this blog will be my soapbox, journal and platform for intellectual thought. Here’s to many years of posting!