What decade are we about to finish up here?

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Valteron

Just for the record, there is no such thing as a decade from 2000-2009. Now of course, there is a period of 10 years which could be called a decade, just as any 100-year stretch could be called a century.

This is always an excellent point. Looking at the decade as lasting from 2000-2009 is a purely arbitrary conceit created by fallible humans. Looking at the decade as lasting from 2001-2010 conforms to laws of physics intrinsic to our cosmos. The latter is clearly the correct approach, despite the fact that most fallible humans have incorrectly identified decades as consisting of those years when the little number in the tens place doesn’t roll over.

Daniel

[robardin]

@Valteron

Just for the record, there is no such thing as a decade from 2000-2009. Now of course, there is a period of 10 years which could be called a decade, just as any 100-year stretch could be called a century.

But if you mean the first decade of the 21st century, it runs from Jan. 1, 2001 to December 31, 2010. So we are not “about to finish” the first decade since it has almost 3 years left in it.

Not really. You see, the first decade had only 9 years in it, the years 1-9. Or else there’s an implied Year Zero of the Common Era (since even Jesus wasn’t really born in Year 1, or Year Zero, and we’re well beyond calling it Anno Domini) where nobody did anything at all interesting worth talking about, a complete write-off in world history. Or you can consider it a one-time rounding error somewhere in the past, it almost doesn’t matter which decade.

Either that, or you adopt on a Quixotian, prescriptivist attitude and go around “correcting” people whenever they refer to “the 90s” or “the 80s” as “a decade”. Which is fine with me too, I find it funny.

[Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor]

I’d call it “Hell On Earth”.