"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