Is this the last month of the decade?

No this is the last month of the decade.

end of thread :(

2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009

Count them.

Well, I've just been on to Wikipedia to confirm this, and I found -

"The Twentieth Century of the Common Era began on January 1, 1901 and ended on December 31, 2000, according to the Gregorian calendar, (2000 was the first century leap year since 1600)."

So, the first year of the first decade of the 21st century must have been 2001, and this would make December 2010 the last month of the decade.

So why did we celebrate with a big millennium party in 1999?

was 1960 in the 60's?

Not according to Wur's theory.

Here you go Wur

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%27s

And this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010s

Well, there was never a year 0, was there? It went from 1BC to 1AD, so that would suggest that the decades start at 1.

logically 2010 is the last year of the decade. imo.

wuw ,whether right or wrong you have to group the decades as they are, otherwise it just wouldnt seem right .

1980 in the 1970s ? nah .

20th century different concept to say 60's or 70's
of course 1970 is in the 70's but Jan 1900 is technically still the 19th century
The day my daughter was 12 she was technically in her 13th year but still a year away from being a teen.

You can talk about the 70s, 80s etc as a convenient time compartment, and they may be popularly referred to as if they are 'official' decades, but the evidence points to decades starting at 1 and ending with 0.

No-one can tell me that the great Brazilian team of 1970 won the world cup in the 60's
You can if you want but it will look & sound stupid.

there was no year zero? so 01 -10 was first set of 10years or decade?

That's right.

We went through all this 10 years ago. The start of the millenium was in fact 1 Jan 2001, we all celebrated a year early. But I think 1999 to 2000 just looks like an exciting change, bit like when your odometer hits 10000 or something.

It's all nonsense anyway of course, just going from one day to the next, nothing to celebrate really.

The only time it didn't count was the 1st year ever - As there was no year 0, It was a missing year, there should have been a year 0, so just THAT decade only had 9 years (an anomaly). The Romans didn't have a symbol for 0, and this difficulty shows you why.
The year 0 should have existed because there was (for us) a -1 or 1BC, and the system went from -1 to +1, and therefore a year was missing.

Had the numbering system for years begun at 100 or 1000 there would be no difficulty.

So, if you forget the 1st decade ever (as there was no year 0). then ever decade since and forever more begins with a year ending with a 0, and ends with a year ending with a 9.

If you want to be pedantic and decide to start at 1, and just go up in 10's from there, then a decade finishes with a 0.
If however you decide that 1960 WAS in the 60's (or the DECADE we call the 60's), then yes this is the last month of the decade.

I can't see what's so difficult :)

panglima 08 Dec 18:45


No-one can tell me that the great Brazilian team of 1970 won the world cup in the 60's
You can if you want but it will look & sound stupid.

No-one is saying that! You are confusing decades with centuries. The 90s went from 1990-1999 (obviously) but that doesn't mean that the 20th C ended at the same time. Cos it didn't, although of course everyone bought into that idea at the time.