"David Barker" <dbarker6@uswest.net> wrote:


> [...]
> so are you one of "those" who think we only have 99 years in a
> century rather than 100?

Heh. Seeing as how the whole event was calculated with an error of at least
5 or 6 years by most estimates, it's probably not worth arguing about TOO
much! Unless you've got a train to catch...

- Bob