Subject:
|
Re: new millenium bugs me
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Nov 1999 14:32:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
712 times
|
| |
|
|
Mark Sullivan wrote:
> (And btw, if you want to follow the screwy
> A.D. calendar numbering system further, then all you 30 year olds out there
> will be glad to hear that you are still in your twenties...)
Actually not. Age really does start at 0. You aren't 1 until you have
been out of your mother's womb (or the petri dish for those reading this
post in the far distant future) for 365 or so days.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: new millenium bugs me
|
| (...) There's a difference between being "in your first year" and being "one year old". If you are 30 years old, then that means you have completed 30 years of life, and are in the midst of your 31st year, so the AD counting thing doesn't hold true. (...) (25 years ago, 30-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: new millenium bugs me
|
| (...) Unfortunately, YES (see below) (...) with (...) then (...) If it were only so (as a coder... I feel that all things should start at zero). Turns out that long ago there was this monk named Denny the Runt who was commisioned by the Pope to (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
