Article View: bit.general
Article #1077Re: Start of Millenium
From: Johan Kriel
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 00:00
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 00:00
26 lines
1431 bytes
1431 bytes
In article <goluboff.825372427@rmchep.Colorado.EDU>, goluboff@rmchep.Colorado.EDU (Mariano Goluboff) wrote: >dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) writes: > >What millenium? The millenium is only RELATIVE to what calendar system >you use. If you use the calendar system that says it is 1996 right now, >then the millenium will not start until January 1st, 2001. If you use as >calendar when whoever-that-person-was was born, then the millenium >started on 2001 RELATIVE TO YOUR CALENDAR (which, as you claim, >corresponds to 1993 our era). The millenium still starts on the first >day of the year 2001, whichever calendar you're using. > >Mariano Goluboff > You arguement is wrong. When you were born you was zero years old, not one. Your second decade starts on the day you are ten years old, not eleven. Your second century wil start on the day you are 100 years old, not 101. etc. So if you simply base your arguement on the calender we use, then the next millenium starts on the first day of the year 2000. Finish en Klaar! Johan Kriel (johank@nac.ac.za)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4gutdf$1is@quince.nac.ac.za>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 112197,dce386d8ffec5339,start X-Google-Attributes: gid112197,public From: johank@srvnac1.nac.ac.za (Johan Kriel) Subject: Re: Start of Millenium Date: 1996/02/27 Message-ID: <4gutdf$1is@quince.nac.ac.za> X-Deja-AN: 141305806 organization: NAC,Faure,SA newsgroups: bit.general