El Reg would like to apologise to all its readers for the recent spate of ill-timed end of the decade articles, which it, along with the rest of the media have been tacking on to the close of 2009. In fact, the end of the first decade of the 21st century does not take place until the year 2010. Or 2004 if a more accurate …
When I was at school
a century year was a leap year when it was divisible by 400.
(why does a reply need a title?)
That's correct. Isn't that what he said?
year divisible by 4 = leap year
Unless it's divisible by 100 = not leap year
Unless it's divisible by 400 = leap year.
That lunchtime pint was a bad idea...
My brain hurts, and I don't know what day it is today any more!
Who cares? any excuse for celebrating by drinking too much gets my vote. Beer icon for obvious reasons.
And now this...
I thought I was off the hook until 2038.
I'm not changing any more archaic date related code until then!
Don't bother faffing with dates on the grounds be don't all work on the land anymore - life would be far simpler for us Brits if they dumped that BST nonsense.
As to the birth of JC - the Romans were notorious record keepers, he was supposedly born during or around the time of a large census in the Palestine region, so it shouldn't be too much trouble for a historian to pick a year?
Happy New Year :oP
It isn't - the census was in 6AD, Herod died in 4BC.
Only one gospel mentions the census, only one mentions Herod (stable/wise men etc).
It's just that it's more fun for the little kids to dress up as sheperds at christmas than have them play at being Roman civil servants - so the Herod story wins.
Second census or first?
You appear to have missed the important point in Luke 2:2 "This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria."
So 4-6BC is still the most reasonable estimate we can make given the historical data available.
Please let it be the end of the decade!
This one has been really, really shit.
Why go backward when you could go forwards?
Not quite sure why you'd want to revert to the Julian Calendar given that it is inaccurate according to the Solar Year. If you're doing that you may as well go Lunar, which would mean that Easter stays still and Christmas moves. At least that would be a change.
Instead we should be championing the Herschel amendment to the Gregorian Calendar to exempt the year 4000 from being a leap year - making it an even better approximation of the solar year. Of course it won't affect us, but it would mean that the calendar will be named after a scientist rather than a theologian.
And that can only be a good thing.
Makes sense but
I'm not entirely sure why I read the whole article??
As tempting as it might be to explain that later, I doubt I'll be able to recall it accurately!
For the love of all that isn't holy
Can't we keep it simple... Is it not easier to celebrate the "Decade" meaning 10 years every time the tens digit is changed, and respectively so the hundreds, thousands, etc? lets face it we don't even know for a fact if Jesus even truly existed, and every one who has ever attempted to prove ANY thing that happened in the bible as being fact has been stacked against with a mountain of refuting evidence... So here is how I see it... We don't know the exact date the earth was created, thus we need some point... We use the supposed birth (or death or some other fictitious date in the middle) of Jesus as a starting point... So assume that the previous year as year 0 and call it a bloody day! (or year if you are so pleased).
"we don't even know for a fact if Jesus even truly existed"
Was that a tin foil hat you were wearing to shield the mind control rays ? I haven't been to America, but I tend to believe that the existence of America isn't a conspiracy because I have reasons to trust those who have been there and who claim to live there. The fact that scientific proof applies to nothing recorded by history doesn't mean the very many who recorded and preserved it are all conspiring against the facts.
Some history within the Bible also ties in extensively with non-Biblical history of the same period, including the Gospels with what Roman historians of the period wrote as well as with current archaelogy, while some Biblical accounts including the Parables and the Book of Job don't tie in with other history - for the somewhat obvious reason that these are presented within the Bible as works of fiction.
So before making sweeping statements like the one above which puts you firmly into the flat earthers and moon landing deniers camp, if you don't want others reasonably to consider you to be either nuts or thick, then you might want to do yourself the favour of studying and thinking a bit more carefully about the subject.
tin foil hats at the ready
thereby QED he was the Son of God and all of your counter arguments are false.
I herby claim that I am the 2nd son of God and that it is the 1st of January 2010...
Now in 2000 yrs time when somebody digs up the El Reg hard drive and, lo, do discover that the date of my proclamation matches the actual date and that furthermore America does exist then I must indeed by the Son of God 2 and must have existed.
[although of course I do exist]
Change you religion :)
Well, Christian Orthodox Church (well, most of them) are still using Julian calendar, so I'm having Christmas on 7th Jan. I'll drink to that occasion, again....And we also have a New year on 1 Jan, which to other people it would be 13 Jan, so I'm having a dress rehearsal for that occasion tonight....
Life is not to bad, Christmas comes twice a year
...anyone of thoughtful demeanor, seeking - as I do - to avoid confusion, bases their personal calendar upon the year in which it is generally agreed that disco died.
May I be the first to wish you all a happy year 12PH (Post Hustle).
Of course it isn't
It's Auld Year's Nicht woo-hoo!
see, that's what smoking does to you
According to this theory, I've lost 6 years of my life, I can only put that down to smoking and alcohol, unfortunately, my wife doesn't allow me to circulate in circles that have loose women as well.(which is fortunate because at that rate, I'd be dead by now), OR is this the afterlife, and I am actually serving time in purgatory already.
So many pub quiz questions in there ..... thanks =P
Thats assuming that the date of his death is correct. Some put it as late as 1BC, or as early as 8BC.
it's the end of a decade though. It's ten years since this bolloxs was last trotted out
So what about the 2012 apocalypse?
When is that happening?
Inquiring minds and such...
The end of the World took place Tuesday just before tea time. You might have missed it because frankly, it was a bit of a cock-up. The third of the seas turning to blood was cancelled since the organising committee couldn't agree on whether calling it 'the Sea of Japan' was politically correct in this day and age; the Antichrist cried off saying that with Simon Cowell still alive all of his work was done; and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are still mired in a particularly malevolent contraflow just outside of Basingstoke (twinned with the Infernal Pit since 4004BC).
re: So what about the 2012 apocalypse?
>"When is that happening?"
Never, just like it was anyway!
I'll need a full risk assessment before you can hold any kind of apocalypse round here.
Who said anything about the "end of the first decade of the 21st century"?
The 80s ended on December 31st 1989. The 90s ended on December 31st 1999.
The 00s end on December 31st 2009.
That's all very well...
But what's the stardate? Alternatively, is there a standard El Reg datestamp we can use, based on the birth of some notable IT legend? I reckon it's 12/11/28APH
It is bad enough for the Julian/Gregorian calendar to omit a year 0, but to have numpties claiming that decades follow the same retarded rules? Geeze!
I follow my dates by the ISO standard, which means I assume a year zero, so do the astronomers, and so should you! :)
Here's a good El Reg timestamp:-
The time at third stroke will be 1262304000 precisely.
Time is relative,..
lunchtime doubly so!
time is an ILLISION
lucnh time duobbley so
look forward to Christmas again in a week’s time!
Are you kidding? After the one I've just had, I'm not even looking forward to *next* year's one...!
We were bored with this pointless debate nine years ago. We are still bored.
"Modern experts prefer 7BC, or thereabouts, as Jesus’ birth day – which means that today is actually 18 December 2015."
Well I'll be happy to put the left-over turkey on hold for seven days, but do we know the exact date of Jesus's birthday. Didn't the early Christians just hi-jack an existing pagan midwinter festival?
Anyway we should rationalise the whole calendar so that year 1 starts with the big bang!
The haggis gets it tonight, come what may!
So its supposed to be 2015.....
That means I retired three years ago and therefore have been working for these muppets for the fun of it since then. Dammit!!! Also it means that the Prince (or whatever his name is these days) was off by a few years, and come to think of it, so was the Millenium bug !!
Happy New Year (or not) as the case may be ;-)
As any fule kno
On any Linux or Unix machine (including a mac) type
And take a close look at September. Notice anything missing?
The calendar has been such a mess in so many places for so long that you're on a hiding to nothing if you're using dates to calculate, well, anything. And don't get me started on Sweden, if you want a good laugh go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar and look for the bit about Sweden adopting the Gregorian calander.
This fule didn't know that
Thanks for that. Everyone chez moi has now had a good laugh at Sweden's expense.
What a useful article
A neatly rewritten wikipedia entry (don't ask me why you expect us to come here instead of there if we'd like to know about this stuff). I suppose El Reg's mandatory wiki bashing policy forbids you from the politeness of putting this text on their page with copypasta?
OS and NS
That would also eliminate the problems with AD and BC, which in more politically correct fora are termed CE and BCE.
The perfect excuse to disappear on a 2,177-night binge while the rest of the world (including the missus and my pay-cheque) catches up.
And don't try to pick holes - my logic is unassailable.
I just read back through the comments and there are a hell of a lot of serious responses. Oops it would appear I have now inadvertently added to them.
Quick, think of something... Ahhh good old Paris.
It Is Thursday though, isnt it?
Standardise on ddate
Today is Setting Orange, the 73rd day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3175.
To me, the decade changes when the ten's place changes. Anything else is trivial gibberish.
Why are we still using a calendar tied to the vague birth date of a long-dead possibly-ficticious prophet, anyway?
I propose we set year zero to a definitive, SCIENCE based date. Unless somebody knows the exact date of some significant event (discovery of fire? creation of wheel?), tomorrow will do - and so a few hours ago at the international date line, it would be 00:00:00 1/1/0.
Any date before that can be measured in negative figures, eg. I was born in -30.
As far as I'm concerned, as soon as the tens digit in the year changes, it becomes a new decade. I don't give a leaping G-d damn about the Year One/Year Zero people.
Happy New DECADE, El Reg!
RE: New year
Given that the year for tax starts April 6th and for schools starts September the1st (or thereabouts) and the various sporting "seasons" all have different timings it seems a bit silly to claim that the day when the year number changes is not the new year. Even sillier than El Reg has become of late.
Sure it may not be the "new legal year" in the same way that tomorrow is the same tax year as today (and the same school year) but the clue is in the question: year 2009 changes to year 2010 - it is not that fucking difficult.
New tax year...
Ah, but the pay I will receive in four days for the work I did in December will not be counted in my current tax year. The period in France is Jan 1 - Dec 31.
FWIW, I am considering this the new decade too. The tens digit has changed. Okay, we start with a "zero" year, but it makes more sense to peg it to the number that changes every ten than otherwise.
And if you disagree, fine, but just remember the "noughties" (yuck, horrible term) have been a disaster in so many ways. Do you REALLY want another year of it?
Use a proper calendar
Why use a calendar that changes round every year, with the dates and the day of the week running on different cycles? It's time we switched to Shire Reckoning.
All of this time business is arbitrary claptrap shoved down our throat by "the man" in a grand Pavlovian experiment. The next thing you know he'll be pulling our strings to trick us into getting up an hour earlier to "save daylight" during a time of year when the bloody sun is only down for a few hours! Another tug and we sleep in so our commute both ways is in the dark, phantoms of the night we'll be! Screw this, tomorrow is the 11th of Unember and the decade ended a week ago at 8:64 on the 37th of Decuary.
- Analysis Oh no, Joe: WinPhone users already griping over 8.1 mega-update
- Opportunity selfie: Martian winds have given the spunky ol' rover a spring cleaning
- OK, we get the message, Microsoft: Windows Defender splats 1000s of WinXP, Server 2k3 PCs
- Spanish village called 'Kill the Jews' mulls rebranding exercise
- NASA finds first Earth-sized planet in a habitable zone around star