Cool NATE! We get it man! You're retarded! That's great that you're proud of how much of a retard you are but cool your jets man. SMart people are talking now!

Mike - The 21st-Century did not begin until the year 2001, despite what most people think/thought. The first decade of this century won't be over until the end of 2010. Think of it like counting from one to 10. You don't start with zero, but with one.

You're dead wrong Nate & Biff New Decade begains Jan, 1, 2010 that is a fact and it doesn't begin in 2011 as you have claim which is a lie. Just like the new Millennium began in Jan, 1, 2000 not 01 as people tryed to lie and claim. New Decade begins in 7 Days.

Wiki Year Zero.

Nate, though you are technically correct... people don't care. It's easier for everyone to call 1990-1999 The Nineties, etc. It's not the end of the world.

Nate's correct (though I don't agree w/his condescending manner)...there was no year 0, right? Thus, the first century was 1-100 AD, the 2nd was 101-200 AD, and so on.

In fact, for all you Jeopardy fans out there, this was actually a Final Jeopardy question on the show's 2nd ep back in 1984 (Calendar date on which the 20th century began)...all 3 players incorrectly answered "What is Jan. 1, 1900?", and b/c all 3 of them risked everything they had, they all went broke...as a result, there was no winner, and they had to have 3 new contestants on the next show (which has only happened twice since).

Nate is RIGHT!
There is no "0" year or decade or century therefore,
year 1-10 is one decade, 11-20 is the second decade, 21-30 is the third on up to 2000 is the end of the 20th century and the decade of the 90's. 2001 was the first year of the 21st century and the 1st year of this decade, therefore 2010 is the last year of this decade and 2011 will be the first year of the next decade. If you question this, search the internet or the library.

Well, first off, the year zero wiki merely states that the gregorian calendar claims no year zero. However, Since people of the calendar's beginnings have little or no concept of the number zero, obviously the year zero would be inconceivable at the time, and so there's little proof of it existing, only logical deduction by modern methods.

Second, the fact that they possibly gave the article early is such a shame, but technically they said nothing wrong. They didn't claim it was the 201st decade in the article. They said it was the first decade in the 2000's, just like you could say that the end of the decade after 9/11/01 is nearly approaching. The 00's decade does not include 2010, as it is not an 00. Simple as that. Stop reading into it.

This is actually directed at Mike. Yes, Mike, the 21st century did NOT start until 2001. The final year of the 20th century was the year 2000. (You might want to note the first two digits of that year.)
The problem with our current calendar system originated with the fact that there was no year 0. The year before 1 CE/AD was 1 BCE/BC, not 0. The first decade of that very first century CE/AD began with the year 1 and ended with the year 10, just as the century ended with 100 (which, as you may have noted was called the FIRST--or 1st--Century); the 2nd Century ended with 200, the 3rd Century ended with 300, the 15th Century ended with 1500 and this current century, the 21st, will end with the year 2100, not 2099. The other main problem is that when we count normally, we do start with 1 instead of 0 but our numeral system (the decimal system) recognizes each digit to hold a specific power. Because of that a two-digit number begins with a numeral that holds a power of "10" and ends with a numeral that holds a power of "1" (the number 55, for instance, has 2 5s, but the first represents 5 10s, or 50, and the second represents 5 1s, or 5; the number 54 is 5 10s and 4 1s while the number 45 is 4 10s and 5 1s--the numerals are the same but the values each represents is different), and in our standard system of counting, we assign all numbers beginning with the same power of 10 as part of a single "decade" (referring to the generic use of the word to mean any set of 10, not just the calendrical use). Of course, we also tend not to use the term "teens" until the specific set of numbers containing that syllable (ie, 13-19) yet, technically speaking, "teen" is a suffix denoting an addition of ten so that the next decade will be the "teens" although most people won't use that until 2013.
Simply put, the first decade of the 21st Century doesn't officially end until Dec 31, 2010 (since the 21st Century didn't start until Jan 1, 2001) but in colloquial usage, we start a new decade on Jan 1, 2010 (as the old one began on Jan 1, 2000).

Hey Nate, I looked at my analog clock, pulled out my calculator and when all is said and done I just figured out you're and IDIOT. When was it that everyone was afraid of the Y2K.... (pulling out calculator and looking at analog clock again..... yes here it is 01/01/2000, so lets see, who's the moron????? NATE IS.... HOHOHO.

No, Mike is correct. The 21st century began in 2000. 2000 through 2009 is 10 years - one decade.

Nate is right. The count starts at 01 and ends at 00.

Mike is correct. If nate was was correct you'd be saying that the 90's would'nt have ended until the end of year 2000.

Ok. The new decade and the new millenium both began January 1, 2001, CE (or AD). The first year CE was not zero; the Romans had no concept of zero. It was the year one. Years 1 - 10 were the first decade CE. Years 1 through 100 were the first century CE. Years 1 - 1000 were the first millenium CE, which leaves years 1001 - 2000 as the second millenium CE. Guess what? That would make the first decade of the third millenium CE 2001 - 2010. All you have to do is count.

Kevin, using "CE" rather than "AD" is so PC. If you don't want a religious angle to the calendar, then you need to pick a new year 1, since "BCE" and "CE" still revolve around the birth of Jesus Christ (even though it appears He was actually born in 4 BC, which is nothing short of a miracle!). So no matter what you call it, the calendar still depends on the Christian Era to make sense. At the time of the French Revolution they tried assigning new years to everything, and in Cambodia in 1975 they tried to as well (with that year as the new year "0"), but obviously it didn't work. So the CE and BCE labels strike me as a bit disingenuous. How did Shakespeare put it? "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...."

Nope Nate was wrong just like you're wrong Blake the new decade begins in 7 Days Jan, 1, 2010 not 2011 which is a lie.

Kevinzpl you're wrong the new Millennium began Jan, 1, 2000 not 2001 as you have claim which is a lie.

goblue, sorry, bud, but YOU'RE the one who is wrong. As many have said here, the first decade of the AD era began with the year 1, not 0, so the 10th year AD ended the first decade, not 9. Bring that up two millennia, and you get 2010 ending the current decade, even though it doesn't feel right. For all practical purposes, we will think of this as the end of the decade, but it's not technically correct.

well... for all you math-majors who believe this to be the end of the decade... please tell me when you start counting from zero!
you start with ONE...
therefore, the decade will begin with ONE.
simple.
But zeroes are so much cooler.
Doesn't make you smart though.