@Knives: THANK YOU! I made a topic about this myself and everybody seemed to misunderstand how far off they were when they responded. I mentioned the program Seinfeld having a joke in it that said that everybody celebrated the new millenium a year early as the number 10 signifies the end of a sequence(decade.)
I mean the number 10 is actually the last number in the sequence 1-10, so why does everybody count 10-19.
The fact is, year's only have number's on them because humanity put them there when they first started recording thing's on parchment's/scribing material in general.
In other word's. Our history as a race in term's of dates is immaterial in the grand scheme of thing's and technically it's highly incorrect. If we want to make the millenium as truthful as possible... Well then, at a very bad guess, we were probably actually celebrating our 4673rd year as the human race we are today, evolutionarily speaking that is and saying that it was humanities 2000th year is just stupid to me. (That's not to say I didn't live it up mind you, lol.)
Anyway back on topic. I completely agree with you on this, and I'm happy to see that there's at least one person that realises that humanity is a year off a proper decade everytime we get to the end of one. For whatever reason, it just became customary to do so.
But, like I said, the calendar is at least 4 years off, and with year 0 missing it's possibly 5 years out, due to the mistakes made by it's creator. This means in 'reality' it's the year 2004. Or 2014. Something like that.
As crusnchill says though, we're only in 'years' because humans put them there. Time isn't one constant.
The Gregorian Calendar starts in the Year 1. I count the decades the same as the topic poster does. To me, the decade ends at the end of next year, because there was no Year 0.
However, for the sake of pop culture and whatnot, it does make more sense to call 1980 the start of the 80's, and 2010 the start of the 10's.
" I get it and I'm with you. There is no year 0 in the Gregorian calendar, and because a decade is by definition ten years, the first decade ran from 01/01/01 to 12/31/10.
Of course, being that strict would have thrown off people's new-millennium celebrations. "
Some calendars don't recognize this when they do the calendars today, but the fact is that there had to be something there whether they recognize it or not.
Some people do and some people don't so really there is no answer - but the general consensus is that there are the 60's (60-69), 70's (70-79), etc. Because some people think there is a Year Zero and some people don't, and because there is no right answer. As that Wikipedia article says, Bede was the first historian to not use 0 - but why should we take his word as fact? He did not have scientific evidence.
So when saying that this decade ends in 2009, it's going along with the general consensus based on the whole 60's, 70's, 80's, etc.
Although some may disagree, neither is truly right because of these old historians who messed it all up. There was no way they could have known - it was all theories and guesswork.
Also,
@Milkman said:
" With that logic, 1930 is part of the 1920s. It makes no sense. "
@hidys said:
" Don't be pretentious. No one works it out that way. "
@Turtlemayor333 said:
" Year zero, year one, does it really matter? We're currently living in the year two thousand and nine, and for the all of the pretentious logic being presented here, it's a whole lot easier to say...
2007 2008 2009 2010 When that number changes, new decade. So easy a caveman can do it. "
Year zero, year one, does it really matter? We're currently living in the year two thousand and nine, and for the all of the pretentious logic being presented here, it's a whole lot easier to say...
2007 2008 2009 2010
When that number changes, new decade. So easy a caveman can do it.
Whether or not that constitutes a historical "decade" is another (largely pointless) conversation, but to say 2000-2009 isn't ten years is mathematically incorrect.
@happyfatman: Da vinci was a minority. The illuminati were a minority. And yet they were the most enlightened of history.
The general consensus! Screw consensus! Some of the biggest discoveries in history were made in times where everyone veiwed these discoveries as wrong/dark magic/evil/scary. Then, over time, they became the new way that thing's worked. Take steam trains for example. People in victorian times were terrified when they first saw this sort of thing. And now we have electric trains that can run at top speed's of upto 269mph.
It was general consensus that Einsteins theory of relativity was completely and utterly correct. He was later proved wrong by another scientist. The important part of this is that that other scientist had found out Einstein's theory was incorrect TEN YEARS AFTER an earlier scientist had discovered it was wrong. Nobody was prepared to believe him, and as sheep they followed the crowd. It was only 10 years later with the second scientist that it was accepted that Einstein was in fact actually wrong. Had we as a race been more understanding, we would now be 10 years ahead of where we are in the fields of scientific relativity.
I'd rather be intelligent and challenge peoples daily "truth's" than be a sheep and accept them. Who know's maybe my logic will help my kid's discover the next step forward in human knowledge. I mean no offense, but I very much doubt your kid's will do so if you teach them your logic.
Accept and bend over or learn and stand up straight.
" Yes it does. The 00's consist of ten years, starting with 2000 (hence the name "00's", or "90's", etc... the first year is the year that begins with zero) "
Like I said, that is the convenient and accepted way of defining a decade in our television culture (as there is no snappy way to refer to 1981-1990), but it is mathematically inaccurate. Unless you think the first year ends on Dec. 31st, 0000. Scientists and anthropologists do not. "
Luckily, games are a part of our television culture and not our science.
" @happyfatman: Da vinci was a minority. The illuminati were a minority. And yet they were the most enlightened of history.
The general consensus! Screw consensus! Some of the biggest discoveries in history were made in times where everyone veiwed these discoveries as wrong/dark magic/evil/scary. Then, over time, they became the new way that thing's worked. Take steam trains for example. People in victorian times were terrified when they first saw this sort of thing. And now we have electric trains.
It was generally accepted that einsteins theory of relativity was completely and utterly correct. He was later proved wrong by another scientist. The important part of this is that that other scientist had found out Einstein's theory was incorrect TEN YEARS AFTER an earlier scientist had discovered it was wrong. Nobody was prepared to believe him, and as sheep they followed the crowd. It was only 10 years later that it was accepted that Einstein was in fact actually wrong.
I'd rather be intelligent and challenge peoples daily "truth's" than be a sheep and accept them. Who know's maybe my logic will help my kid's discover the next step forward in human knowledge. I mean no offense, but I very much doubt your kid's will do so if you teach them your logic. "
Just want to say that I love how you're comparing "the biggest discoveries in history" to an argument over semantics. It's a such a big deal! You sheep and your "decades." Bah!
" I get it and I'm with you. There is no year 0 in the Gregorian calendar, and because a decade is by definition ten years, the first decade ran from 01/01/01 to 12/31/10.
Of course, being that strict would have thrown off people's new-millennium celebrations. "
Some calendars don't recognize this when they do the calendars today, but the fact is that there had to be something there whether they recognize it or not.
Some people do and some people don't so really there is no answer - but the general consensus is that there are the 60's (60-69), 70's (70-79), etc. Because some people think there is a Year Zero and some people don't, and because there is no right answer. As that Wikipedia article says, Bede was the first historian to not use 0 - but why should we take his word as fact? He did not have scientific evidence.
So when saying that this decade ends in 2009, it's going along with the general consensus based on the whole 60's, 70's, 80's, etc.
Although some may disagree, neither is truly right because of these old historians who messed it all up. There was no way they could have known - it was all theories and guesswork.
Also,
@Milkman
said:
" With that logic, 1930 is part of the 1920s. It makes no sense. "
@hidys said:
" Don't be pretentious. No one works it out that way. "
@Turtlemayor333 said:
" Year zero, year one, does it really matter? We're currently living in the year two thousand and nine, and for the all of the pretentious logic being presented here, it's a whole lot easier to say...
2007 2008 2009 2010 When that number changes, new decade. So easy a caveman can do it. "
These. "
No, it is something that can be tested empirically. Start counting from the first year, 0001, to 2009 and you will see that mathematically, the decade ends Dec. 31st, 2010.
My game of the decade is probably The Wind Waker. It's tough just narrowing it down to one, but the sum of that game's parts just really worked magic on me that I hadn't felt in a Zelda game since A Link to the Past. Shame the hate it used to get, but I think people have been coming around over the last two or three years.
I doubt any game in the next year will be as successful as World of Warcraft and have the staying power it has had the past couple of years. Sure it wasn't the most innovative game or hardest game ever created, it also isn't a console game which is a HUGE market in itself. All that aside the game was just so well designed that other games created in it's image have failed to replicate the same success.
@Knives: Dude, there were many many years before 0001. Saying that the Earth is only 2009 years old is just ignorant. You don't know when the first year was and even before that, it had to start from nothing. Something always has to start from nothing. The Earth is billions of years old. If scientists can't determine exactly how old the Earth is I doubt some random on a video game forum can. Give it up - there is no right answer because no one knows.
" Yes it does. The 00's consist of ten years, starting with 2000 (hence the name "00's", or "90's", etc... the first year is the year that begins with zero) "
" @Knives: Dude, there were many many years before 0001. Saying that the Earth is only 2009 years old is just ignorant. You don't know when the first year was and even before that, it had to start from nothing. Something always has to start from nothing. The Earth is billions of years old. If scientists can't determine exactly how old the Earth is I doubt some random on a video game forum can. Give it up - there is no right answer because no one knows.
Wow, I don't even know where to start on this comment. Nobody said the Earth is 2000 years old. I don't know how you came to that conclusion. You thoroughly missed the point. The point is that when our species decided to start recording history, the first year they recorded had to be year #1. The "time" before year one is irrelevant. You don't experience the first year of recorded history and say on New Year's Eve, "well, the zeroth year is over. It's time for the first year to begin."
" Yes it does. The 00's consist of ten years, starting with 2000 (hence the name "00's", or "90's", etc... the first year is the year that begins with zero) "
I was born in 1965 for whatever that means, thus, given the Julian Calendar, I'm 44 years of age. I will turn 45 in less than a month.
It's all semantics and not science in my book, but the semantics change to fit the science. "80 to 89", "90 to 99", "00 to 09"; life trumps video games.
Reflection is a cruel twist upon fate and we all live it.
" Yes it does. The 00's consist of ten years, starting with 2000 (hence the name "00's", or "90's", etc... the first year is the year that begins with zero) "
this /thread "
You have to break the rules in order for this to be true. The first decade would only have nine years. 01-09.
" Yes it does. The 00's consist of ten years, starting with 2000 (hence the name "00's", or "90's", etc... the first year is the year that begins with zero) "
this /thread "
You have to break the rules in order for this to be true. The first decade would only have nine years. 01-09. "
It would be 00 - 09. The time of death of baby Jesus would be 00... the beginning and then let's move on. Hell, was the Julian Calender even implemented at that time. I doubt it.
" Yes it does. The 00's consist of ten years, starting with 2000 (hence the name "00's", or "90's", etc... the first year is the year that begins with zero) "
this /thread "
You have to break the rules in order for this to be true. The first decade would only have nine years. 01-09. "
Mathematically you are correct. Now why don't you quit being stubborn and just accept the fact that at no time in this lifetime are you going to change the entire conventions of a society.
" @Knives: Dude, there were many many years before 0001. Saying that the Earth is only 2009 years old is just ignorant. You don't know when the first year was and even before that, it had to start from nothing. Something always has to start from nothing. The Earth is billions of years old. If scientists can't determine exactly how old the Earth is I doubt some random on a video game forum can. Give it up - there is no right answer because no one knows.
Wow, I don't even know where to start on this comment. Nobody said the Earth is 2000 years old. I don't know how you came to that conclusion. You thoroughly missed the point. The point is that when our species decided to start recording history, the first year they recorded had to be year #1. The "time" before year one is irrelevant. You don't experience the first year of recorded history and say on New Year's Eve, "well, the zeroth year is over. It's time for the first year to begin." "
What I'm saying is that all the years before time started being kept could be counted as 0.
Log in to comment