1 I prefer "naughties" myself.

2 "Now, we start counting centuries on the year labeled 1" Most folks do not do so. Sloppy use of language is something we should encourage?

3 I prefer to ignore such arbitrariness. 

4 Slow day Gabe?

5 You don't care and I don't care. Let's discuss.

6 This is getting its own post?  Glad there's nothing going on in the world.

7

I thought most people started the century on the zero year as well. e.g. the twentieth century becan on Jan 1, 1900.

I agree, this decade began on Jan 1,2000 and ends Dec 31, 2009.

 

8 I have heard people insist 1999 was the last year of the 20th Century because they heard it on the news and it sounds better.

9 The whole decade numbering thing is historically artificial and decimal system centric.  I rather doubt dinosaurs or cave men counted decades, and there's a fair chance our arachnid and octopus friends are using an octal numbering system, while the worms are pretty happy with binary and a reality that's largely 2-dimensional rather than 3.

This species-centric and number system-centric prejudice must stop.  Its not right and will undoubtedly infuriate our future alien overlords.

10 I'm experiencing dejavu right now - didn't I read about/hear about this very thing back 10 years ago?  Although there was a tinge of panic to the discussion, as many were convinced that Y2K would bring about the apocalypse....

11 many were convinced that Y2K would bring about the apocalypse...

It did.  It was only reported on Fox though, which made it not real news.

12 "...arachnid and octopus friends....."

I'm ok hanging out with our octopus homies, but the arachnids?  No sirree.  Cannot. Hang. With. Them.  They creep me out.

13 Why do people start counting years at zero and everything else at one? And what is this "Patient Zero" crap?

14 a decade has passed since the Nineties and so it's time for some Top Ten lists.

I might be more interested in the decennial tradition if I didn't already know every single list offered up on television was going to be mindless progg talking-points.

Top Ten New Technologies will all be about global warming and Barry's campaign; top movies will all be anti-American, top "socially concerned celebrities" will all be Bush-bashers, etc.

15 @11

*snort*  Heh.

16 They creep me out.

You sound like some kind of reichwing hater.

17 I blame Peter Jennings. He started this 1999 crap. And Prince didn't help either.

18 I was hoping for a post concerning dangling participles.

19 a decade has passed since the Nineties

I feel old.

20 You sound like some kind of reichwing hater.

You betcha!  I can handle snakes, no prob.  But those 8-legged monsters with their multiple eyes and hairy bodies?  Nope.  Nopey nope nope.

21 Worst post of the decade or worst post from 2000-2009? Discuss.

22 That was sposed to be me.

23 Gabe's crimes against Humanity continue in the post above. Kahhhhhhhhhnnnnn!

24 It's very simple really. The last year of the 20th century was 2000. The last year of the 19th was 1900. And so on and so forth. Only in math does something begin with zero. When one starts counting, you always start with one. Those years at the end are considered the turn of the century, not the first year of them.

25 This whole matter really illustrates the power of choosing the right label for something.

26 24, All true except many folks do not think this way, and are quite proud of it. We are doomed.

27 Only in math does something begin with zero.

How does that make you feel?  Let's draw in our journals about those feelings!

28 Will this be on the test?

29 If counting starts with zero, then how many wives did Henry truly have? And was he the Eighth or the Seventh?

30 Put it this way, there was no year zero. We started out with year one AD. One hundred years from there is year 100, the first century. The people who count zero as the first year of a decade are getting it wrong. And by the way, many historians count the "decade of the sixties" as ending in 1973. Figure that one out. I realize this whole thread is just quibbling but it is also true that neither decade nor centuries start with a zero year. All I know is I spent 31 Dec. 1999 at Disney World watching the Electric Light Parade, subconsciously waiting for the electricity to suddenly go off.

31 The Red Sox have more championships than the Yankees. In the 21st century, anyway.

32  Only in math does something begin with zero. When one starts counting, you always start with one.

Yet, I open my wallet and see nothing.  I'm pretty sure zero is real

33 I'd give this post a 0+

34 Maybe do Top Ten Jihadis Connected to Anwar Awlaki, SBCBUH*.



* Satan's Barbed Cock Be Upon Him

35 Not even mathematicians start counting with zero, not really. Zero is the absence of quantity. It makes as much sense to count a "zeroth" finger as a "zeroth" year. We can conceptualize decades however we want, but strictly speaking any decade begins with the first new unit of that decade. After 10 is finished, then comes ll, not before. 10 completes the first... ten; when 100 is done, the next hundred begins. Only when 2000 was finished did the new millennium begin, i.e., with the start of 2001.

36 All I know is that this decade came in like a lion and is going out like a pantywaist.

37 I just want to smack the next person right when he reaches to type "E" after "B.C."

38 Can we call it the Hawties? Anyway, I have to say I'm mildly disappointed no one really thought of a name of this decade or - I suppose that will be the case, anyway - the next decade, either. I was sure someone would come up with a name that would be catch on. If nothing else, doesn't Time Life Records have a vested stake in thinking of a good label for their inevitable Album Collection? Will anyone ever be excited by "The Music of 2000 to 2010"???

39 Oh, Janet Napalitano sock puppet begone!

40 37 I just want to smack the next person right when he reaches to type "E" after "B.C." Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at December 28, 2009 01:25 PM (2QFX4) Amen, Brother! The asswipes that prefer the labels "Common Era" and "Before the Common Era" make one huge multicultural boo-boo: Common to WHOM? Muslims? Chinese?? Jews??? Sorry, but they all have their OWN Calendar. And besides: the Western Liberals that are uptight about "Year of Our Lord" would think using a date based on Buddha or something would be cool. Oh, and here's a mind numbing fact Mark Steyn just reported on Rush's show: Amsterdam is is on the cusp of becoming a majority Muslim city. So I guess all Charles Martel did for Europe was give it a 1,500 year reprieve from Islam. Terrifyingly, inside of one generation the Liberals were able to do what asiatic invaders since the time of Darius and Xerxes could not effect by force: end Western Civilization in Europe. Way to go, guys.

41 Will anyone ever be excited by "The Music of 2000 to 2010"???

People who graduated HS in 2009?  But it won't be the music (if you can even call most of it that) that excites them, it will be the memories of what they were doing when the songs were playing.

42

Will anyone ever be excited by "The Music of 2000 to 2010"???

There hasn’t been any good music since the early to mid 70s and it was going downhill then. MTV killed the music industry, not “illegal copying”.

43 I stand firmly with the pedants here. 40 years or so ago, I corrected my 4th grade teacher when she told the class that the stars in the sky were reflecting the sun's light just like the moon. She had the courtesy to apologize the next day in front of the whole class...but it really has been that bad for that long. Here in this community we are debating a myriad of issues from war to healthcare to the economy, and definitions, accurate descriptions, agreed upon terminology, all matter. We will all scream that an 'increased cost' is really a tax, but how to prove it if we don't agree on a definition. Its a small thing, really...they all are; but once we allow 'close enough' to become our driving principle, all is lost.

44

Help me then.

When I was born I began my first year.  When I had my first birthday I was 1 year old.  I had lived an entire year.  At the moment of my 1st birthday (the day I became 1) I began my 2nd year...which I completed when I was 2.

And so on.

On my 10th birthday I had lived 10 years...a decade.

Why does this not follow with the rest of it?

45

Pedants are tiresome.  I'm sure they all had a huge millennium blowout at the end of . . . the year 2000.

Of course, 99.99% of humanity had their party the year before.

January 1, 2001 was NOT the first day of the 21st century.

It's very simple:  When the number changes, the decade (or century, or millennium) changes. The End.

Yes, I understand the logic behind your argument.  I simply reject it as preening foolishness.

We need to focus on more important issues, like punctuation.

46 <i>January 1, 2001 was NOT the first day of the 21st century.</i>

Right, because centuries only last 99 years...

47 You say pedantry like there's something wrong with it.

48 The problem is we are supposedly marking our time since the birth of Christ, but theologians generally agree Jesus was born sometime between 4 to 6 B.C.E. (http://blogs.pioneerlocal.com/religion)

49

It is a shame that so many people are mathematically inept when it comes to decades or centuries. How many socks in a pair? Two If you had the second sock in your hand, would that be the last sock of the firs pair, or the beginning of a new pair? Is the 12th egg the last egg of the dozen, or the first egg of the second dozen?

There is no such thing as year zero. Regardless if you count the beginning of a year as "One" or the end of the first year "one,"  consistency requires that ten are counted until you usher in a new decade. It does not matter where you begin the count. Once ten go by, then that completes the dacade. Once 100 go by, that completes the century. Once 12 goes by, that completes a dozen.

While it is socially inept to argue about this, it is nontheless unfortunate that our society is incapable of practicing  a little bit of thought. The year 2000 was ushered in as a new century. It is in fact, the last year of the century not the first year of the next century. However, 2000 is a nice even number and requires no mental processing; it's easier for most people to grasp. It's much easier to accept that number rather than making 2001 the first year of the new century. By letting these apparent hair splitting things go by, we actually encourage undisciplined thought. It is that undisciplined thought, and not the topic itself, that is troubling. This is social habit, and it's unfortunate.

This is certainly not an earth shaking distinction. It does say a lot about our society when inaccuracy becomes acceptable. It deteriorates the effectiveness of the English language. "New and Improved!" motivates a lot of people. Newer and improved compared to what? The advertiser wants us to think that it's compared to the competitor. It does ot mean that. It means nothing. These bind assumptions happen because of undisciplined thinking. It is the assumption that's dangerous. Accurate thinking is like anything else; it requires practice to gain the skill.

However, we can improve that skill without argung. we can improve by each one of us practicing consistent, logical, and accurate thinking. THEN when the important things come up, we can catch those really important distictions when doing so is truly important. How many times have you heard of peple getting in trouble because they assumed meaning in the written word when they should have verified the meaning by getting clarification?

Write to me if you would like to buy a dozen eggs consisting of 11 eggs.

 

 

 

 

50

Help me then.

When I was born I began my first year.  When I had my first birthday I was 1 year old.  I had lived an entire year.  At the moment of my 1st birthday (the day I became 1) I began my 2nd year...which I completed when I was 2.

And so on.

On my 10th birthday I had lived 10 years...a decade.

Why does this not follow with the rest of it?

 

You've answered your own question. On your tenth birthday, you celebrated a decad of life that has passed. You have then, by your logic, not lived into your second decade until your 11th birthday. The end of that 11th year marks your new decade of life.

Suppose you celebrate whenever you FINISH washing every pair of socks, just like your first birthday celebrated your finishing of your first ytear of life.At 12:01 AM, you BEGAN your second year of life. You could not celebrate that first pair of socks until the second sock is washed. You "lived" for on pair of socks, so to speak. You begin a new pair when you throw that third sock into the machine, ot the second sock. Does this help at all? We therefore BEGIN a new decade in 2011. 2010 marks the BEGINNING of the last year of the decade, not the beginning of the new decade.

Measure time by whatever means you like. As long as you understand your thinking and you can convey that thinking in an accurate way to other people, then that is all that matters.

Everyone has their peeves. To some, it's when a decade ends. For others, it's grammar and speling. There are always bigger fish to fry regardless if your thing is pedantry, spelling, or grammar. If you (collective you) are happy with the accuraccy of your thinking process, then run with that, and don't piss and moan when other people voice their passions, whatever they are and how ever ridiculus it may seem. Thankfully, we are all free to speak.Personally, I keep quiet and don't make a big deal, even though I'm well aware of the logical error.

If the year 2010 is the end of the decade or the beginning of the new one, what difference does the distinction really make? It is only INTERESTING to discuss the topic in an openminded way. We won't change the minds of others regardless of the time spent discussing it.

George Boole

 

 

51 Now, we start counting centuries on the year labeled 1. For example, the Nineteenth Century began on January 1, 1801, rather than on January 1, 1800. That does not mean that when we refer to the 1800s, the year 1800 is automatically excluded. English doesn't work that way. Meaning is derived from usage, not a mathematical quibble. Sorry, you lost me there. Fact is, the common usage is to consider any year ending with "00" as the first year of that century. As per my Mac's built in dictionary: USAGE 1 In contemporary use, a century is popularly calculated as beginning in a year that ends with ‘00,’ whereas the traditional system designates the ‘00’ year as the final year of a century. This discrepancy was particularly apparent on January 1, 2000, which was commercially celebrated worldwide as the first day of the 21st century, even though January 1, 2001, was regarded as the more proper date for this milestone. 2 Since the 1st century ran from the year 1 to the year 100, the ordinal number (i.e., second, third, fourth, etc.) used to denote the century will always be one digit higher than the corresponding cardinal digit(s). Thus, 1492 is a date in the 15th century, 1776 is a date in the 18th century, and so on.

52

Changing years, changing decades

Regarding Mac's built in dictionary, those words tie the New Decade discussion together quite nicely.

I don't have a problem with following laws of usage, even if they go against logic or mathematics. The purpose of language is to communicate meaning. Compromises have to be made for the sake of transmitting the meaning from one person to another.

I have a major problem with mathematic or logical ineptitude, or other things that suggest lack of the simplest thinking. The problem arises when we try to count "things" and keep track of "years" that have gone by.

We learn how to cound in first grade, and we bgin with zero.his is for the purpose of intruducing us to the numbers themselves inadditio to how to count.

Where many people make a logic error in distinguishing decade rollovers has to do with what's called "leading edge count" and "trailing edge count"

Counting eggs is a leading edge count. We finish the dozen when we touch the 12th egg which is the last egg of a dozen; the 12th egg is not the first egg of the second dozen.

Conting years past, is a trailing edge count. A year of life means we survived for a year. When we celebrate ten years of life, we have lived for a total of 10 years. On our 12th birthday, we lived for a dozen years. When we celebrate our 13th birthday, that is the first year of our next dozen years. When we celebrate our 11th birthday, we are celebrating the fact that we survived the first year of our second decade of life. On our 100th birthday, we have lived for a century. On the 101st birthday, we're celebrating survival of our first year in our new decade, and so on. The day after our 100th birthday, we are BEGINNING the first year of our second century of life. Here is where you could get into trouble by confusing a leading edge count with a trailing edge count, and thusly think that your 100th birthday is the beginning of your new century.

Leading edge count, trailing edge count, it does not matter that much. Where you run into trouble is confusing numbers from one counding system with the numbers from the other counting system.

Now, suppose we have some rules of grammar or rules of usage where by mtual agreement, numbers ending in 00 mark the beginning, rather than the end, of a century. If you want to do that, it's fine so long as everyone knows what you mean. But only argue the point on logic/mathematical grounds unless your reasoning is solid. You look foolish otherwise.  And don't toggle back and fourth between a logic argument and a usage argument. Pick whichever concept fits you the best, and run with it.

My preference is that we stick with what's logically correct, but I'm not going to have a stroke if we prefer a "standards of usage approach" But please, the mathematicians/logicions, don't spend your life trying to prove the "terms uf useage" people wrong, and vice versa. You're both right.

George Boole

 

 

 

53 Haosheng is a leading manufacturer and exporter of Air Compressor,Airbrush,Airbrush accessory,Vacuum pump,Spray gun,Mini air compressor,Airbrush compressor kit,12v air compressor,Airbrush Relative product airbrush compressor etc in China

54 Thanks for sharing this! Bishop Jordan Personal Growth