Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Gingerbeer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bah! Lack of forgiveness creates emotional

> baggage. My personal preference is one small

> carry-on per person.



My forgiveness is precariously stored in the overhead locker which means it could fall on anyone - Good Luck to all for the New Year!

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Main thing about 2013 is the fact that it brings

> the first teenagers born in 21st century


You sure about that? If the century began on January 1st 2001 wouldn't someone born that year be 12 this year?

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> AM, the century began on 01/01/2000.

> Hence all the end-of-millenium parties the night

> before.


AM and I seldom agree - but he is right, despite the many millions of people transfixed by a change of number on 31 Dece 1999. There wasn't a "Year Zero" so the end of AD 1 was 31 December 0001 and the second millenium came to an end at the end of the 2,000th year - ie 31 December 2000.


Therefore the 3rd millenium and new century began on 1 January 2001.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hmmm, strictly speaking there weren't any years

> between 1AD and 525AD, and only a few doughty

> enthusiasts experienced 526AD to around 800AD.



Yeah but - in terms of calendar and number logic ...........

Indeed! I've been reading that the actual AD 1 year was chosen because it meant that there would be a gloriously convenient conjunction of the planets in exactly AD 2000 - neatly facilitating the end of the world.


However, the fact that the Bible was clear that Jesus was 30 during some Roman Emporer's notable moment meant that Jesus could only have been born around 4 or 5 BC.


But then I also understand that none of the Churches seem to give much of a fig about that, so we probably shouldn't either.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • No they aren't. You're coming across as a smug, superior liberal, and that's what old fashioned voters (labour, Cons and now Reform) hate. That 'the deplorables' 'they're all ignorant racists' line is what's driving people away from the traditional parties and towards Reform.  You're as guilty of looking back as Labour. This is a new, post-europe world and we all need to come to terms with that, make do with what we have, and move forward.       
    • I have sympathy with any voter, anyone, who having witnessed the last 14 years and then Labour in the last year and wonders just how can things be this bad  unless a) they voted for brexit b) voted Tory after 2010 c) is thinking of voting reform  because anyone who thinks reform won’t make things a thousand times worse after voting for the previous?  It is they who are the problem.  They are the reason the country is in the doldrums with an embarrassingly-timid Labour government  Specifically Chris mason - a not very bright right leaning stooge - large part of why bbc news has become grok-level slop  
    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...