Mine had the red underline too, but google chrome wouldn't offer the correct spelling, even though I did right click on it. (I just tried it again and it's working now. Idk why it wasn't before. I probably overlooked it. )
I'll edit it now lol.
Moonraker wrote:
It only matters if getting things correct matter to you.
Getting things correct matter a lot to me, but in this particular case, the start of 2000 seems way more significant than the start of 2001, regardless of the official definitions of a millennium. Personally I think the point Ice Maiden was trying to make was more related to what feels more significant than what is actually a Millennium.
Darrell71 wrote:Getting things correct matter a lot to me, but in this particular case, the start of 2000 seems way more significant than the start of 2001, regardless of the official definitions of a millennium. Personally I think the point Ice Maiden was trying to make was more related to what feels more significant than what is actually a Millennium.
Yes, I agree. To most people in the world, 2000 was the start of the new Millennium .
'Oh voice of Spring of Youth
hearts mad delight,
Sing on, sing on, and when the sun is gone
I'll warm me with your echoes
through the night.'
It certainly would've been for me, if I'd been alive back then. Damn, I just realized it's been more than 16 years since 9/11. And I'm about to turn 16 in 2 months. I feel like I want to be 10 again and just run around with my dog all day.
Rob Houghton wrote:Yes, I agree. To most people in the world, 2000 was the start of the new Millennium .
I imagine the fact that the year starts with 20 rather than 19 is worth celebrating whether or not it is the 'proper' start to the new millennium or not. I just wish people would say twenty-eighteen and not two thousand and eighteen. After all, the date of the Battle of Hastings was never pronounced one thousand and sixty-six.
OK, as I sometimes do, I went back to my old posts and read a few things from 2012, when I was 10. I now conclude that I most certainly do not want to be 10 again.
Happy New Year 2018.. haven't check this forum for a while. I spend little time reading EB in 2017 due to busy year. I hope able to read some books in 2018!
reread 2015 - Barney Series ,The Secret of Killimooin reread Feb 2023 - The Rilloby Fair Mystery
Moonraker wrote:
Oh, I'd love to be 10 again. Imagine, a new Blyton released! I'd also have at least 57 years ahead of me - something I know longer have.
What does make you so sure of that? Maybe there'll be a medical breakthrough. Scientists consider it possible for human beings reaching the age of 140 years (though it's far from biblical ages, I know ).
IceMaiden wrote:
If I've got it right, it's because everybody 18 or over born on or before 11:59pm on Dec 13 1999 is an adult. Anybody born after 12:00am on Jan 1 2000 is going to be a child. Even if they turned 18 at midnight Sunday they would still have been born within the new millenium. That's how it was explained to me anyway .
Except that won't be true until 1 Jan 2019, when it actually IS 18 years after the start of the new millennium.
Gah! I didn't work it out I just got told it . Surely anybody 17 on 31.12.17 at 11.59pm is going to be 18 - and therefore legally adult - on 1.1.18 at 12:00am? If it was 1.1.19 they'd be 19 and then it wouldn't work because they'd already be adults in this millennium. My head's gone funny now with so many numbers!!
Society Member
I'm just an old fashioned girl with an old fashioned mind
Not sophisticated, I'm the sweet and simple kind
I want an old fashioned house, with an old fashioned fence
And A̶n̶ ̶o̶l̶d̶ ̶f̶a̶s̶h̶i̶o̶n̶e̶d̶ ̶m̶i̶l̶l̶i̶o̶n̶a̶i̶r̶e̶