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 ...
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.
Thank you!
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.