🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <35c26a7a.167433871@news.surfshop.net>,
dilbertfan@usa.(dot).net wrote:

> �    That's right, the first day of the 21st Century and new millenium is 
> � actually January 1st, 2001!  If you don't believe me, check The World 
> � Almanac's calendar section.
> 
> Only in factuality.  In everybody's mind (except yours and mine), it's
2000, so
> there's really no use debating it.

My response cannot avoid religion, since religion -- specifically the
birth of Christ -- is the key factor in calendar system used by the U.S.
According to everything I have read, the birth of Christ did not occur on
Dec. 25, 1 A.D.  It probably occurred 5 or 6 years earlier, which meant
that Christ would have been born in the "B.C."--not "A.D."--era. Thus,
*scientifically*, we're already in the new millenium. But even if Christ
had been born on Dec. 25, 1 A.D., the Gregorian calendar we currently
follow was two weeks off from the Julian Calendar then in effect. So, the
*scientific* celebration of the true millenium cannot take place on Jan. 1
of any year. 

Accounting for dates 1,000 years ago is necessarily arbitrary. For
example, until 1752, American colonies followed British law of recognizing
New Year's Day as occurring in June. When Britain adopted the Gregorian
calendar, 11 days were eliminated--so that Jan. 1, 1753 was moved to Jan.
12, 1753.

Also, the common convention is to view ten years as constituting a decade,
ten decades constituing a century, and ten centuries constituting a
millenium. I've heard no assertions that the decade of the 1990s did not
begin until 1991. 

Complicating attempts to assign a *scientific* day that the next millenium
begins is that the first millenium had a flawed measurement system--there
was no true zero base point. Rulers start with 0 mm or 0 inches.
Thermometers begin with zero degrees. But imagine a measurement system
that has "1" as its base point. Of course, there's no zero day of a week,
or zero day of a year. But, when accounting years, we don't say a
just-born baby is one year old. It takes the passage of an entire year to
say that a baby is one. Back to the religious basis for counting time,
Jesus at age 20 would be living in year 21 A.D. My imperfect,
unscientific, common sense alternative is to view the first century as a
99-year, one-time-ever exception. I also expect that well over 99 percent
of the world will join me in observing the advent of new millenium at one
minute after midnight on Jan. 1, 2000, the same day incidentally that the
first decade of the 21st century begins. If we cannot agree to a
convention on the accounting of time, then any assertion that any one day
(i.e., Jan. 1, 2001) marks the scientific anniversary of the 1,000th day
since the birth of Christ is based on shaky ground. And, if you remove the
religious basis for the calendar, then what will you base the millenium
on? One thousand years from what? And how do you count those years?

The overwhelming consenus of popular opinion seems to be that Dec. 31,
1999 will be the last day of the 20th century. Just check with travel
agents on the availability of hotel rooms in or near Greenwich, England
(site of the prime meridian) on Dec. 31, 1999 compared with Dec. 31, 2000.

Ed Jackson