Universal Love Essendon Team of the 21st Century

[efcboy]

Hardwick doesn't fit the criteria of having played 50 games for Essendon this century and why are we including 2000? The 21st century started on Jan 1 2001.

The 21st century started Jan 1 2000. Any other logic is flawed. For example 1999 is the last year of the decade known as 90s. 2000 is the first year of the decade known as noughties which is part of the 21st century.

 

[Halftimehero]

The 21st century started Jan 1 2000. Any other logic is flawed. For example 1999 is the last year of the decade known as 90s. 2000 is the first year of the decade known as noughties which is part of the 21st century.

You are wrong sorry

 

[Halftimehero]

Because a lot of people count 2000. It's not uncommon.

A lot of people are wrong, but that is also not uncommon.

 

[Mercuri Rising]

The 21st century started Jan 1 2000. Any other logic is flawed. For example 1999 is the last year of the decade known as 90s. 2000 is the first year of the decade known as noughties which is part of the 21st century.

1AD - 10AD
11AD - 20AD
...
1991AD - 2000AD
2001AD - 2010AD

 

[efcboy]

No the international standards were changed in 1988 to correct the flawed antiquated Gregorian calendar. ISO8601 corrected 1AD to the year 0000.

 

[efcboy]

1AD - 10AD
11AD - 20AD
...
1991AD - 2000AD
2001AD - 2010AD

Under this logic Essendon won two flags in the 90s (93 and 2000). Should have been team of the 90s!...the international standards as I posted above were changed in 1988 to correct a ridiculously flawed system - it's just a lot of historians refuse change and are slow on the uptake.

Years should be treated the same as age - you're not born at one. You start at zero and work your way towards one (it is your first year but you're not 1 until 12 months). Likewise throughout 1999 this was the 2000th year but not actually 2000 until the end of that 1999 year. Any other logic is flawed as far as time elapsing recording methods go.

 

[Halftimehero]

No the international standards were changed in 1988 to correct the flawed antiquated Gregorian calendar. ISO8601 corrected 1AD to the year 0000.

You are wrong mate

 

[efcboy]

You are Wrong mate

Nah the year 1 AD is an old misconception. The problem is most world governments are manipulated by religions who hold differing views. Scientifically the international standards are absolutely correct.

The international standards by ISO8601 now works with the year 0000.

It's all covered in this link:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601

 

[Halftimehero]

Nah the year 1 AD is an old misconception. The problem is most world governments are manipulated by religions who hold differing views. Scientifically the international standards are absolutely correct.

The international standards by ISO8601 now works with the year 0000.

It's all covered in this link:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601

Show me where in there it says the year 2000 is the first year in the 21st century? officially 1 BC is the first year in the Gregorian calendar, thats a fact, whether you believe it should or shouldn't be is irrelevant.

 

[efcboy]

On topic from 2000 Hardwick only played 45 matches so if 50 matches was the minimum criteria then he's out in any case.

 

[efcboy]

Show me where in there it says the year 2000 is the first year in the 21st century

Do the maths! 0000-2000 = 2000 years. Therefore on January 1st 2000 we had entered the 2001st year which is part of the 21st century. January 1st 2001 is part of the 2002nd year.

I turned 39 on November 16. Now I'm actually in my 40th year of existence (39 years and 21 days thus far)

 

[Doss]

Well, this jumped the shark a bit.

 

[Halftimehero]

Do the maths! 0000-2000 = 2000 years. Therefore on January 1st 2000 we had entered the 2001st year which is part of the 21st century. January 1st 2001 is part of the 2002nd year.

I turned 39 on November 16. Now I'm actually in my 40th year of existence (39 years and 21 days thus far)

Nobody gave birth to the world though mate, it just started and it started at 1, that is officially a fact.

 

[efcboy]

Well, this jumped the shark a bit.

I had this argument with a kangas fan a while back. When he declared the year 2000 was part of the 90s he got pissed off when I said Essendon were the team of the 90s! Then he said the footy calendar worked differently to suit his argument!

This is one of the world's biggest misconceptions - you have the international standards in 1988 declaring the year 1 BC as the year 0000 and this was ignored by and large when it came to determine the end of the 2000th year.

 

[efcboy]

Nobody gave birth to the world though mate, it just started and it started at 1, that is officially a fact.

That's again flawed logic. Time has a zero reference point - the calendar is a reference of time so needs a zero point. Does your stop watch start at 1 second or 0 seconds? The international standards set the year 1BC as year 0000. I've given you the link referencing the year 0000.

It's a nonsense to declare the calendar year should start at 1. It actually makes zero sense!

 

[Halftimehero]

That's again flawed logic. Time has a zero reference point - the calendar is a reference of time so needs a zero point. Does your stop watch start at 1 second or 0 seconds? The international standards set the year 1BC as year 0000. I've given you the link referencing the year 0000.

It's a nonsense to declare the calendar year should start at 1. It actually makes zero sense!

But you are still ignoring the fact that officially in the Gregorian calendar the first year is 1.

 

[Liberator]

Mm, mmmm, fascinating.
I'd have Froggy in mine, controversially

 

[monty1104]

Mm, mmmm, fascinating.
I'd have Froggy in mine, controversially

Lucas shades him at CHF I reckon.

 

[efcboy]

But you are still ignoring the fact that officially in the Gregorian calendar the first year is 1.

As I stated earlier the Gregorian calendar is outdated and really is the working of the catholic religion. The international standards are the official worldwide authority on all things time related. Given only 16% of the world's population is catholic in 1988 the international standards made the logical change to the calendar as required. Under ISO8601 BC and AD no longer exist. You have year 0000 and 1AD is merely year 1 and so on. Years prior to year 0000 are now recorded as negative ie -100 as opposed to 100 BC.

This has been an extremely slow uptake in countries such as Australia with a heavy catholic population hanging on to outdated flawed logic. Hindu and Buddhist religious countries have recognised the year zero for much longer.

 

[Philzsay]

As I stated earlier the Gregorian calendar is outdated and really is the working of the catholic religion. The international standards are the official worldwide authority on all things time related. Given only 16% of the world's population is catholic in 1988 the international standards made the logical change to the calendar as required. Under ISO8601 BC and AD no longer exist. You have year 0000 and 1AD is merely year 1 and so on. Years prior to year 0000 are now recorded as negative ie -100 as opposed to 100 BC.

This has been an extremely slow uptake in countries such as Australia with a heavy catholic population hanging on to outdated flawed logic. Hindu and Buddhist religious countries have recognised the year zero for much longer.

The ISO is a non-government body.

Most of the Western World still uses the Gregorian Calendar as their civil calendar. The US Naval Observatory is the official source for the standard of time for the United States. Likewise the Royal Obseravtory of Greenwich is the official timekeeper of the UK, while the National Institute of Standard and Technology is the official time keeper of Canada. All three of these organisations put out statements declaring the 1st of January 2001 to be the first day of the 21st Century and the 3rd Millennium.

The Gregorian Calendar may be outdated and flawed, and not meet the ISO standards like the 'Astronomical Year Numbering' calendar does, however it is what most of the Western World still uses.

 

[Mercurial89]

Id love to hear thoughts on whether pluto is a planet.

Or a discussion on our team of the 21st century. Whichever is least like a debate on calenders.

 

[Philzsay]

Id love to hear thoughts on whether pluto is a planet.

Or a discussion on our team of the 21st century. Whichever is least like a debate on calenders.

It's a dwarf planet, that has nightmares about St Kilda players

 

[Doss]

Id love to hear thoughts on whether pluto is a planet.

Or a discussion on our team of the 21st century. Whichever is least like a debate on calenders.

Even on Pluto, you could not make a case for Courtney Johns being in our team of the 21st century.

 

[Bombers Fan]

Andrew Welsh anyone??

 

[VelvetSledge]

B: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton
HB: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton
C: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton
HF: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton
F: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton
R: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton

INT: Stanton - Stanton - Stanton - Stanton