Archery is cool. Do you have to go to the butts or are you set up at home? Have you found the zen of it yet?
Good for you, @Ndutch. You should make sure that these come out in your application, and that you show an intellectual curiosity and hunger for its sake.
@Ndutch, no one is targeting you, and your future is certainly very bright, whether you get in to the top schools on your list or not. What experienced people ARE trying to do is make you aware that a 2400, impressive sounding though it may be, does not carry all that much weight, that you shouldn’t be over-confident based on high test scores and GPA, and that you need to give a stronger of yourself as a unique applicant in order to stand a better chance.
A holistic application is a very small window into an applicant’s actual life. Usually a dirty window. The adcom is looking through that window trying to figure out who really is the person behind it. The trick is to show a window that gives schools a vivid impression of you as a dynamic, passionate, engaged person - someone who they instinctively react to as a person who they would like on their campus. SATs and GPA speak to your ability to handle the work, but they don’t do much more than that. Your choice of courses, outside activities, essays, recommendations and supplemental materials (if any) are what really give shape to the picture. As much as an application is only a small view of your actual life, a short “chance me” blurb is so much so. We can only go on the information presented. Rather than treating everyone as “targeting” you, you should treat this as a valuable learning exercise about how you want to present yourself differently in your actual application. You want adcoms to get a sense of you as a person, not as a “robot” with perfect SAT scores. If you are a nerd, show it. If you are curious, show it. If you like to go off the beaten path and do things differently, or if you do things without thinking about how good they look to others, show it.
Adcoms at top schools don’t want kids who build up their resume with lots of superficial activities. They don’t want kids who are busy dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s trying to make themselves look good. They want kids who are smart enough to succeed, and who are intrinsically engaged, passionate, curious, and motivated about a variety of things. That can show up in any number of ways. If that’s who you are, the trick is to make it come through on your application.
I noticed that you listed Boy Scouts (friends)?
If you are not a scout, I would not list Boy Scouts as an EC because being an actual Boy Scout, versus helping Boy Scouts are two totally different things. Listing 30 hours as a non-scout may appear to look like padding.
Scouts put in hundreds, if not thousands of hours in community service projects. My son was constantly “serving the community” year round, especially during his summers. He did earn his Eagle award which garnered him more letters of recommendation from troup leaders, coaches, and the Principal of his school. He didn’t have a perfect SAT but, missed that by two questions.
The point is to list ECs that you actually involve your passions, not a list of hours.
I concur with @renaissancedad’s assessment and advice. It’s important that you try to convey all that he says because otherwise adcom’s can’t distinguish you (and all the intellectually curious things you do for enjoyment) from the kid who spent 10 hours a day gaming over the summer. Top schools don’t want kids who will just be beating a path to the library for four years.
Sorry if it sounded like I was insulting you guys, I’m extremely grateful for the help. 
OK, so how does this sound?
Volunteering - Astronomy Research Lab at my state’s capital’s museum
ECs - Model UN President, Varsity Captain of Tennis Team, NHS, NLHS, Astrophotography, Programming (yes, no?), I l also write stories (yes, no? If they ask for them I’d be happy to send them in)
Harvard, MIT and Stanford: Very low chances
Cal Tech: Low chances
Good luck to you!
Do your best then pray!
@20more Why does he only have very low chances?
Everybody has low chances at those schools unless he/she has hooks.
Their admit rates (RD) are less than 5% so they are reach schools automatically.
Quantitative is great, but ec’s and awards are below average for these schools. What makes you more interesting than the next 2400?
Wow, these comments are harsh. You have done very well.
Your ECs suggest you lean more academic than people-management. This makes you a good fit at Berkeley and Caltech, both of which love that profile. I think you have good chances at both and they’d be a good fit.
The other three lean more towards people-management ECs so you are less likely but still have a shot, so you may as well send in the application.
Please let us know how it turns out!
@Ndutch, there’s a new summer astrophysics research program at Yale that sounds right up your alley. It’s called the Yale Summer Program in Astrophysics: http://yspa.yale.edu.
I think with perfect academics but less ECs, you’d be more likely for Caltech and UCB. They put a little bit more emphasis on scores than Stanford (idk what they put emphasis on), mit, and harvard (where leadership is more important). I’m also applying to Stanford and MIT, under CS though. Love to get your opinion: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/1837466-stanford-mit-columbia-what-do-you-think.html#latest