Message to the newsmedia: The decade isn't over!

Perdogg

[Perdogg]

I keep seeing all of the specials and news stories about the "Decade's best this.." and the "Decade's best that.." however, the decade is not over.

The new decade will not begin until January 1st, 2011.

You cannot have year 0.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Sorry. While the millenia are certainly numbered incorrectly, decades are arbitrary, and have been defined as being the years 0-9 of each set of 10 years.

It would be different if we were calling it the 200th decade, but if it is just a name, like “the decade of the 90’s was, you can make the decade any set of 10 years.

[Petronski]

The “Seventies” ended 12-31-1979, the “Eighties” ended 12-31-1989, the “Nineties” ended 12-31-1999 and the “Noughties” will end 12-31-2009.

[Chunga]

Why not have a year zero?

Sure...why not?

Attention, denizens of the Western world:

Prepare to change your calendars and your history books, for Nateman has suggested it.

[nobdysfool]

Are you going to tell us the 20th century DIDN'T include the year 2000???

2000 was the last year of the 20th century. 2001 was the first year of the 21st century. 2100 will be the last year of the 21st century.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Who cares that there was no year zero? or more accurately, that the numbering system does not allow for a year zero, since in reality there was no year 1 either until years later when they renumbered the calendar.

The 20th century should have been the 20th set of 100 years, and covered 1901-2000.

But the “decade of the 200s” started at 2000, and goes through 2009. It’s arbitrary.

And while we could argue over whether this is the “1st decade of the 21st century”, I would argue that with 9 out of the 10 years of the 00s being in the 21st century, that it could reasonably be called the 1st decade of the 21st century.

[CharlesWayneCT]

But we don’t name decades that way. The “90s” was “the 90s”, not the 190th decade. We don’t number decades like we number centuries, we simply started NAMING them based on the middle two digits of the years.

So the “roaring 20s” are the 10 years that have the number “20” in them.

[Petronski]

The '90s began on January 1, 1991. They ended on December 31, 2000.

There is no ninety--there is no NINE--in 2000.

Show me the nine in 2000.

[CharlesWayneCT]

If the REAL century ended in 1999, and it was simply common wisdom that it was at the end of 2000, we would have had more luck convincing people.

But trying to convince people who wanted a party that they should wait another year was simply more than we could accomplish.

Especially since we had the “Y2K” computer fiasco, which cemented the idea that the transition from 1999 to 2000 was somehow “important”.

Pluse, in 1901 we didn’t have 40 years of mind-numbing public school education making people stupid.

[Petronski]

The ‘20s didn’t include 1920. They included 1930.

You forgot the <sarc> tag.

[aruanan]

If the REAL century ended in 1999, and it was simply common wisdom that it was at the end of 2000, we would have had more luck convincing people.

Wait, it was common wisdom that the century (and millennium) ended at the end of 1999, whereas the century (and millennium) really ended at the end of 2000.

[Chunga]

There is no ninety--there is no NINE--in 2000.

Duh.

Show me the nine in 2000.

There isn't one. It's irrelevant.

[aruanan]

But you can have year 2000.

That's because it's the 2000th year. There was, however, no 0th year. You can have a 10th inch on a ruler but the first inch is not the 0th inch.

[Chunga]

You forgot the <sarc> tag.

Refute something, and try to appeal to some standard beyond your own convictions.

[aruanan]

January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2009 = 10 years. Right?

The 1990’s decade ended on Dec 31, 1999.

And February 1 2003 through January 31 2012 = 10 years or a decade. And while it's correct to say the 1990's decade included all the years of 90s, it would be incorrect to say that 1990 through 1999 was the last decade of the 20th century.

[Petronski]

There isn't one. It's irrelevant.

It's completely relevant. You seem to be confusing ordinal numbers (the first century, the twentieth century) with the colloquial reference to a group of ten years which share a common third digit.

[Perdogg]

1990+10 = 2000

[Petronski]

...it would be incorrect to say that 1990 through 1999 was the last decade of the 20th century.

Yes it would be incorrect.

Has anyone on this thread said otherwise?

[Petronski]

Correct!

[aruanan]

Has anyone on this thread said otherwise?

Not yet, but there's always someone who will.

[aruanan]

You’re confusing two different things. The last decade of the 20th century was from January 1, 1991 through December 31, 2000. But the 90’s decade was the ten years that have “9” in the tens position, ie, 1990 through 1999; that’s why they were called the “90s.”