But the new decade doesn't start until 2011!!!!

[Bright Star]

Something that occured to me: For example-the 1980's is said to have started in 1980. BUT isn't it also a part of the 70's as well? Any year ending in zero could be the start of one decade & at the same time the beginning of another. sort of like a "gateway year".
So 2010 would be the beginning of the 2nd decade of the 21st century AND also the the end of the first decade of the 21st century.
That's another way of looking at it.

[crashhelmet]

I want to add one more thought to this, to appease the mathematical minds.

We count our years in the decimal system, or Base 10. Those numbers start at 0 and end with 9. There is no actual 10. Just as in Binary, or Base 2, the numbers start at 0 and end at 1. There is no actual 2. (The number 2 in Decimal is 10 in Binary).

CH

[Lachrymose]

If there's no "Zero Year" then what do we consider the first 12 months of our lives? After those 12 months, we become a year older. I turn 35 on my 35th birthday, not my 36th. Are people still in their 30s when they turn 40? 2011 will be the end of the first year of the decade. The decade will end when the new one begins in 2020.

CH

Hmmm...good point.

1 B.C. would be (essentially, I know it's supposedly not accurate, but I'm just using this as a moment in time) one year before the birth of Christ.

Therefore A.D. 1 would be a year after the birth of Christ.

So, the birth of Christ to A.D. 1 should be the "zero year".

[crashhelmet]

If there's no "Zero Year" then what do we consider the first 12 months of our lives? After those 12 months, we become a year older. I turn 35 on my 35th birthday, not my 36th. Are people still in their 30s when they turn 40? 2011 will be the end of the first year of the decade. The decade will end when the new one begins in 2020.

CH

[AdminAssistant]

Admin if someone took a topic you knew about and repeatedly gave others incorrect information on it would that not bother you?

Of course. It bothers me that people consider an uneducated actor and second-rate businessman from Stratford-upon-Avon to be the greatest writer of the English language when there is practically no proof. However, I have accepted that most people don't realize William Shakespeare was just a pen name and they like the story so....so what?

And, yeah, people considered 2000 to be the new millenium. I did too.

[jackfaire]

It's much different than spelling errors, I think.

Was more comparing the new millennium to spelling errors.

Admin if someone took a topic you knew about and repeatedly gave others incorrect information on it would that not bother you?

If they then argued that you yourself were wrong and an idiot for feeling that they are wrong would that not bother you?

[Cats]

IMO, both are correct, but in different contexts. If you are counting from the very beginning and counting every 10 years from then, then yes, technically, it does not start until 2011. But you're counting in terms of a block of 10 years grouped together for a convenvient reference point (such as the 1950's, 1980's, etc), then it has already started.

But hey, the term decade itself does not define where it starts, so from 1935 to the end of1944 represent a decade of time as well.

A decade is 10 years measured from the starting point, no matter how you slice it. There's no point in arguing over where you started, since you can start pretty much wherever the hell you want.

So yeah, I'm in the "who the hell cares" category. What happens this year isn't going to be changed by what decade someone considers it to be a part of.

[AdminAssistant]

In terms of history, a decade is considered to be, for example, 1920-1929, then 1930-1939. Which would then be referred to as the 20's, the 30's, etc. That's just how it is, folks. It's much different than spelling errors, I think.

But hey, celebrate your new decade in 2015. Who cares?

[jackfaire]

It's like how other people are bothered by spelling errors; it can be argued you knew what the person was saying hence it doesn't matter if they spelled it correctly and you shouldn't be bothered by it.

[Lachrymose]

We are in a new decade. The previous decade includes the years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 & 2009. Count them & you'll see it's 10 years! 10 years makes up 1 decade.
Makes sense to me.

Yes, but the bone of contention is usually that 0 wasn't a year, so you count from year 1 to 10, not from 0 to 9.

That also makes sense.

Although I honestly don't really care either way.

[Boozy]

Those scientists who are just mad cuz they never get invited to any New Decade or even New Year parties?

That would be my guess.

After all, who wants to hang out a party with someone who feels the need to correct people over small little things that aren't even important?

[Lace Neil Singer]

The whole calendar is most likely fucked up; so who gives a toss, seriously? Those scientists who are just mad cuz they never get invited to any New Decade or even New Year parties?

[jackfaire]

Hearing people refer to 2000 as the new millennium or that this is the start of a new decade is like reading people type in net speak.

I am sorry but yes if someone can't read a calendar that does give me pause and until they prove otherwise make me question their intelligence. I don't harp on it but it is something that is pretty straightforward.

One of the annoying parts is pointing out to people that millennial prophecies they are so damn concerned about call themselves millennial but are dated for 2000 thus are complete bunk

[Bright Star]

We are in a new decade. The previous decade includes the years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 & 2009. Count them & you'll see it's 10 years! 10 years makes up 1 decade.
Makes sense to me.

[RootedPhoenix]

While it might not technically be a new decade until 2011....too bad, so sad for the "technical" new decade, I'm celebrating it now.

If someone feels the need to do it next year, then they certainly can. But don't spoil my fun.