Skip to comments.Identical Fla. Twins Born In 2 Separate Decades (Neat)
Posted on 01/02/2010 3:56:23 AM PST by rawhide
Identical twin boys in Florida will get to celebrate their birthdays individually after they were born in separate decades.
Margarita Velasco delivered the twins by cesarean section at Tampa General Hospital.
Marcello was delivered just before midnight. His twin, Stephano, was delivered just as the new year began.
Their father Juan says it'll be good for each boy to have his own birthday party.
The twins are in intensive care because they were born about 10 weeks early.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Added from another news source:
The first is Marcello, who was delivered at 11:59 p.m. Dec. 31. The second is Stephano, who arrives just after the stroke of midnight. It's Jan. 1, 2010. Marcello is 2 pounds, 4 ounces and 15 1/2 inches long. Stephano is 2 pounds, 4 ounces and 15 inches long.
Neat that they are twins, but this decade will end December 31, 2010. There are ten years in a decade and we just completed the ninth.
Actually that doesn’t work for decades. The 20s were 192X, not 1930. If you were to say this is the 200th decade, you might have a point. But ti doesn’t work like centuries, mainly because we are referring to the date when we say “the sixties” and not “counting” them.
I see your point, but there is many who argue over this point. The neat thing is that they were born in different years.
2000 to 2009 ?
As a certified tax preparer, I no that the family will only be able to claim one of them for the 2009 tax year BUT they will be able to claim the whole dependent tax credit of 750 Gazillion dollars give or take a penny!
...but what do I know. I'm not the Count!
Just curious as to which decade you would assign January 2nd, 2000 to?
Exvept pf cpurse they weren’t since 10 is still part of the decade
The decade will not end until Dec 31st 2010.
You must have 10 years in a decade and there is no year zero. For example, The last year of the 70s was 1980, because we cannot have 197010. Mark Davis got it all wrong.
Just curious as to which decade you would assign January 2nd, 2000 to?
Why can’t Jan 1st, 2000 be the first day of a new decade?
both are anchor babies...Resident zer0 declares them citizens...
because there was no year 0.
Call it what you want, but for the next TEN years, the date will end with 201_, beginning yesterday, and THAT’s a fact.
It’s surprising how many people I have to explain that to.
Wouldn’t Dec 31st, 0000 be considered the last day of the first year?
It would have been if there had been a year 0, but there was no year 0.
So what decade do you put day 12-31-00 into? It has to be considered the last day of the first year of the first decade of the first century. (Do not confuse my argument with the years BC and the years AD). I am making the arguemnt as if the beginning of time began on 1-1-00.
It’s surprising to me that anyone would attempt to convince someone that the end of the 60’s is something other than 12/31/69 or that 12/31/1960 is not part of the sixties. That’s kinda what “the 60s” means.
Decade designators are different than centuries purely by how we define them. Centuries are counted. Decades are “named” based on their number in the tens place. Like it or not, that is the way it is. It is not a math problem. It is a communication method. If communicating with reasonable people is not your goal, you have lots of good options on how you define terms. Technically, every day starts and ends a decade, which is merely a ten year period.
There is a difference even in different ways of defining centuries. I’ll agree that June 1 1900 is in the nineteenth century. It is also true that it is part of the 1900s. To say otherwise would be silly.
I’m not at all surprised that you have to explain it to people. I’m equally unsurprised that they don’t argue with you about it. :)
the decade of the 90s. Since you cannot have 199010.
I do not agree with the point you are making, but let’s leave it at that. We’ll call it a FRiendly disagreement. Gotta go.
The problem with your logic is that you cannot tell me what happened in year 0.
In fact, it would be hard press to try convice someone that 1960 had any relations, socially, to 1969.
2000 was in the last century
The whole problem is that there is no “year zero” in the calendars. The concept of zero, which was invented by Hindu mathematicians and transmitted to the western world by Islamic mathematicians through the use of Arabic numbers, was not applied to the western (Julian and then Gregorian) calendars. I don’t think it was applied to the Islamic (Hijri) calendar either. Now that I think further, the calendar was developed long before the concept of the zero. This may be a part of the confusion.
What's so neat about two more anchor babies?
Actually, it does work that way.
A decade is defined as a 10 year period.
According to your incorrect interpretation, the first decade of this, the 21st Century, would only be 9 years.
That's only 90% of a decade, can't be.
Yeah, what’s with these “news organizations” that don’t know what a decade is? And we are supposed to trust everything they say? These people are really becoming a laughing-stock.
If you can't even get Centuries correct, your shouldn't even attempt to impose your illogical ideas on decade.
June 1, 1990 was in the 20th Century and we are now in the 21st Century.
You need to rest, must have partied too much in the last decade.
Sorry folks, but this is technically correct. Simple point of fact. You can argue against it all you want, but it does not change that fact.
What you CAN argue is that the public perception is that we are now in the new decade. That is largely correct, since about this topic, the general public is simply ignorant. Wouldn't be the first time... "irregardless", the babies were born in separate years, so thats cool...
I think you need to rest and re-read what I posted. I said nothing about 1990. I'm illogical from your perspective perhaps, but I'm at least literate.
The problem with your logic is that you think that year zero matters in everyday language. It doesn't. If a child is born on July 17, 1970, I don't think anyone would say the child was born in the sixties. Do you? I will agree that he was born in the 196th decade AD, but that's an odd construct and not one conducive to communication.
Since your argument doesn’t make logical sense, I’m not surprised at you either.
yes I do. 1970 was the last year of the 60s. We are not going to agree on this one, I don’t want to argue with a FRiend! :)
Agreed. My point - my only point - is that it comes down to definitions and what one wants to do with them. A case can be made for either, depending on the audience and purpose of the definition.
Why so angry? Not just you, but others as well. Just curious. Seems an odd thing to get overly concerned about.
Did you ever stop to think that if we were born with twelve fingers (or eight) instead of ten, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation?
Ok then.....back to school fer me !........:o)
You don’t have to argue. YOU ARE BOTH RIGHT!
Decade is defined as ‘a period of 10 years’, PERIOD! If you are referring to the decade of the 60’s then that is 1960 to 1969. If you are referring to the calendar decade it is 1961 to 1970. The FIRST year of the calendar began with year ONE.
Sure we would. Except we'd be arguing about when the octade or whatever you call a period of twelve years ends.
Thanks for the best resolution of this argument I’ve seen.
The 2000s ended a couple days ago.
The 201st decade ends in about 364 days.
At least you’re aware of the difference, which is commendable.
I’m on your side! The 0 decade started with 00 and goes through then end of 09. Decades means 10 years, and 00 through 09 is 10 years. To me it has to do with the way the years are numbered. In our counting system when you bump nine by one you replace it with a zero. Seems open and shut to me, but I can see how some would see it the other way too!
It’s like the old trick you play on a kid to prove that he you have 11 fingers. Hold up your left hand, fingers extended. Start with the thumb on that hand and number the fingers 10, 9, 8, 7, 6. Then hold up the 5 fingers of the other other hand “Plus 5 equals 11!” One of the neatest tricks in the book for kids and adults.
It has to do with the difference in counting and numbering. They are not the same!
yes, it’s like arguing six or a half dozen.
Enough of the sticklers who want to lecture about when a decade starts.
The odometer flipped to 201_ and will stay that way for ten years...which is basically a DECADE.
we could all use a bit more study :)
There is considerable disagreement on your point.
From Wiki: "Some writers like to point out that since the common calendar starts from the year 1, its first full decade contained the years from 1 to 10, the second decade from 11 to 20, and so on. The interval from the year 2001 to 2010 could thus be called the 201st decade, using ordinal numbers. However, contrary to practices in referencing centuries, ordinal references to decades are quite uncommon."
From the Cambridge online dictionary: "a period of ten years, especially a period such as 1860 to 1869, or 1990 to 1999"
A decade can be broken down in two ways...and in common usage...its 0-9. That's 10 years. You're straining on a gnat...
What millenium is it in?
12/31/2000 was the last day of the 20th century and the 2nd millennium
Seems as I remember everyone celebrating the new Millenium on January 1, 2000.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.