19th March 2003, 1:23 AM
Yeah, they COULD be that way, but why worry about it? I mean, it's 1000 years right now since 1000 years ago, and why isn't there a year 0? Christ wasn't born 1 year old! There had to be a 0 year if it's based on when Christ was born, right? 2000 just looks a lot more natural.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)