There seems to be a debate between when our calender started Year 1AD or year 0AD. The former would make each century begin on the second year of every cultural decade while the latter corrects the problem but isn't widely used.

Just to clarify, I'm not attempting to redefine any decades are anything. I'm simply making note of the dissonance between  Dionysius(who's calender starts at year 1AD), computer scientists(who added a year 0AD in place of 1BC), and popular opinion(who celebrated the new century/millennium in 2000). with such confusion, its difficult to decide on which system to follow, the computer scientists or Dionysius. Many scholar actually make note of the year 1AD calender and follow it, while the computer scientists astronomical calender sort of corrected the issue but don't seem to be widely used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_%28year%29

Well, when it became 2000 most people celebrated the new millennium.
Officially, the year 0 did not exist. 1AD follows 1BC. But at that time, our calendar wasn't in existence of course,
(and it's probably 5 years off, but ok).

People define decades, based on the third digit of the year, because that's what people see change every ten years (70s, 80s etc).
Because of that, the new decade following the 90s did start in 2000 in people's minds (no matter if it is scientifically correct that 2001 was the beginning; it shouldn't matter though, because it's all based on people's decisions). It also was a magical number, with all numbers new, and it started with a 2 (which took some time to adjust to, writing dates down).

Anyway, I remember everyone celebrated it in 2000, and not in 2001.

I think we celebrated the new millennium in 2000.

We celebrated in 2000. Never heard of anyone doing it in 2001.

We celebrated in 2000. Never heard of anyone doing it in 2001.


Yeah why would anyone celebrate a year later?  ::)

Yeah why would anyone celebrate a year later?  ::)
Unless the party lasted over a year?

Unless the party lasted over a year?


a party should last a day.

a party should last a day.
True, with a day to recover, then back to work.

2000.

I never would have done such a thing if I travelled to 2005 in Doc Brown's Delorean.

1999/2000. The only special thing about the New Millennium was the change of all four digits from 1XXX to 2XXX. Even though, the actual New Millennium started in 2001, most people celebrated the change from 2000-2001 like any other New Year's Eve.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fofcLXshq_8

anyone remember this clip where Jerry says the new millennium doesn't start till 2001?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fofcLXshq_8

anyone remember this clip where Jerry says the new millennium doesn't start till 2001?


No, I only watch the early episodes. This show was at its best in the fall of 1992.

1999/2000. The only special thing about the New Millennium was the change of all four digits from 1XXX to 2XXX. Even though, the actual New Millennium started in 2001, most people celebrated the change from 2000-2001 like any other New Year's Eve.


So why did they think it was going to be in 2000?

So why did they think it was going to be in 2000?


Like I already said: The change from 19-20 + the end of the 90s was the big deal here and not the actual change of the Millennium. Most people, me included, didn't care about when the 21st century or the 3rd Millennium actually started.