Hi all. I pass on this thoughtfull analysis of what is now almost common
knowledge. It appears all is not what it seems or what we are told about the
effect of the Y2K BUG. Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael J. Coppi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2000 4:57 PM
Subject: In Search of 0 A.D. & Y2K
-------- Forwarded Message --------
----------
Subject: Catholic Perspective: In Search of Zero A.D.
Date: Friday, January 07, 2000 7:08 AM
Catholic Dispatch
During this Christmastide, which extends from Christmas Day until the
octave of the Epiphany (Jan. 13), we also celebrate some notable Feast
Days, such as that of the Holy Innocents (Dec.28), the Circumcision
(Jan.1), the Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus (Jan.2) and the Feast of the
Holy Family (Jan.9). Unfortunately, our minds tend to be greatly
preoccupied with thoughts of the "New Millennium" and the year 2000 (also
known as Y2K). Although it is certainly an interesting and even momentous
time to be living to see this moment in history, it would be sad to see any
Catholic hold the change in the year as a delight even above an ordinary
Feast such as that of the proto-martyr St. Stephen (Dec.26). On the other
hand, if a Catholic finds delight in the change to the year 2000 as a
special reference to the anniversary of the Birth of Christ, then that's a
most commendable thing! But, we must remember that in
God's eyes such an
anniversary is really no more important than any anniversary of His birth
on earth, whether it be in the year 646, 1924 or 1998 - it doesn't matter.
It is more the secular world of humanists, anti-Christians, general
worldlings and the Mass Media that try to make something special of the
year 2000, while ignoring the very reason for its existence - the birth of
Christ in the year 1 A.D. Some people even act in
somewhat of a
superstitious manner as though the number "2000" has special significance
in itself. A great portion of the Mass Media, socialist ideologies, are
using the occasion to foster a global & international mentality by making
it a celebration of solidarity across the globe. The "errors" spread out of
Russia, that Our Lady of the Rosary warned about in 1917, are indirectly
being fostered by the creation and solidification of the "world community"
mentality (International Commune?) since the so-called
"fall of communism" in 1991. But that is a subject for separate treatment.
Today, the world wishes to praise itself for being intelligent and
well-advanced. Yet, what is this constant talk of the "New Millennium"? Is
it just over-confidence in the Mass Media, ignorance, or because those in
prominent positions in the world wish to put Christ out of their mind so
much that they cannot even bring themselves to think back in history to see
that Christ was born in the year 1 A.D.? Whatever it is, the simple
mathematics of a schoolboy one can easily see that the "New Millennium"
does not begin until the year 2001 A.D.
1-100 The First Century
101-200 The Second Century
201-300 The Third Century
1-1000 The First Millennium
1001-2000 The Second Millennium
2001-3000 The Third Millennium
Those who insist on celebrating the "New Millennium" an entire year
early would have to also claim that the year 0 A.D. historically existed
even though it did not! Although the modern world, in its pride, seeks to
make much of its technological advances, we must admit
that it really is
just a relative handful who have developed these while the rest of the
world tries to take credit merely for living in the same age as their
developers. The world at large however shows how it cares more for mere
appearances than for the inner reality....more for a change in the
appearance of numbers (from 1999 to 2000) than for the reality that - the
New Millennium does not begin until the year 2001. For many, of course,
there may be the added desire to simply have a party at every chance
possible regardless of what is being celebrated.
This judging of mere appearances over the true reality is more a
characteristic of the ignorant and irrational, and the materialistic. If
such is the footing upon which the world enters the New Millennium with
such a simple, historical and mathematical blunder as celebrating it an
entire year early, then how much can we heed the words of the same people
who speak of "hope" for the years to come? Truly, we can only speak of
hope for the world when we reflect on the health of the members of the
Catholic Church, of the Mystical Body of Christ. That is the determining
factor. Unfortunately, as easily as people have overlooked the start of the
New Millennium in 2001 they have overlooked the fact that the Catholic
Church today is suffering the worst crisis it has ever seen in history as
it now directly involves the upper hierarchy and the papacy itself. Heresy
is the order of the day, and Catholics in general no
more recognize it than
recognizing that the New Millennium does not start until the year 2001. We
must continue to pray, heed the warnings of Our Lady of
the Rosary, and
educate ourselves in the teachings of the Church in order to prevent
spiritual shipwreck both for ourselves and the world at large. Let us not
mistake being realistic and prudent for what some people too quickly call
"pessimism" because they don't want to think of things that they consider
"negative", regardless of whether they are true or not. To expose error is
to direct our steps towards the truth...and that is
always optimistic.
In regard to the date of the Third Millennium, some may delve into the
matter too deeply and become unnecessarily concerned
about how it effects
the observance of Our Lord's birth. There have historically been arguments
and controversies about the exact date of Our Lord Jesus
Christ's birth.
Christians in times past have taken great pains to determine the exact year
and day that He was born in Bethlehem, and some say that it may have really
been in 3 B.C., but such efforts were done for the sake of ordinary
truthfulness because the exact year and day has nothing essentially to do
with the Faith. The Lord does not care that we celebrate His birth on earth
exactly when "the earth is in the same position to the sun" as it was when
it historically happened. The Lord is concerned only
that man, His rational
creatures, periodically, and with regularity, turn their hearts and wills
toward Him to recognize and celebrate an observed anniversary without
superstition. Let us not fall into what can be classified a superstitious
"vain observance" in regard to dates.
"Anno Domini" (in the year of Our Lord) is not the same as an
"anniversary". The former INCLUDES the year Our Lord was born, and the
latter begins count the year AFTER Our Lord was born. So, we can either
celebrate the year 2000 BECAUSE it is the observed 2000th "year of Our
Lord", or we can celebrate the anniversary of Our Lord's birth in 2001
along with the true start of the Third Millennium. The Lord would be
pleased for man to celebrate both in the their true context in which they
are referenced, and without superstition.
The New Millennium doesn't start until the year 2001. The real secular
celebration is next year. Let us pass the word on to
others! Rather than
just rely on logic to convince people, we can offer them some solid
evidence. The fact that the Third Millennium does not start until 2001 has
for some time now, probably a year before the change to
2000, been
mentioned on the Internet in several places. The most notable is the site
of the United States Naval Observatory
(http://aa.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/millennium.html).
Here is a quote from that site:
"Years of the Gregorian calendar, which is currently in use today, are
counted from AD 1. Thus, the 1st century comprised the years AD 1 through
AD 100. The second century began with AD 101 and continued through AD 200.
By extrapolation we find that the 20th century comprises
the years AD
1901-2000. Therefore, the 21st century will begin with 1 January 2001 and
continue through 31 December 2100.
Similarly, the 1st millennium comprised the years AD 1-1000. The 2nd
millennium comprises the years AD 1001-2000. The 3rd millennium will begin
with AD 2001 and continue through AD 3000."
Also, the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, England
(http://www.rog.nmm.ac.uk/leaflets/new_mill.html) mentions the same fact.
It mentions that, 200 years ago, the periodical, "The Times must have
received many letters towards the end of 1799, since its editors felt moved
to make the following comments about the beginning of the 19th Century:
"We have uniformly rejected all letters and declined all discussion upon
the question of when the present century ends, as it is one of the most
absurd that can engage the public attention, and we are astonished to find
it has been the subject of so much dispute, since it
appears plain. The
present century will not terminate till January 1, 1801, unless it can be
made out that 99 are 100... It is a silly, childish discussion, and only
exposes the want of brains of those who maintain a contrary opinion to that
we have stated." [The Times, 26 December 1799]
After reading this, one can only ask, "Are we REALLY so much more
advanced than those living in 1799?"
THE "Y2K BUG"
This new year, of course, we have to deal also with the "Y2K bug". It
would have been better had the world recognized that the true Millennial
celebration is not until next year, so as not to mix the celebrations with
all of the anxiety that the Y2K bug has occasioned, and
still occasions.
Experts say that we can still experience new problems caused by this
"programming oversight" even in the months ahead as computer software runs
new portions of code and accesses different sections of
critical databases.
Also, when computer systems are left running through the change of the
year, problems may not become noticeable until the computer is next
restarted.
Immediately it could be noticed that the Mass Media jumped upon the
occasion of the smooth transition of the New Year to point out that modern
computers were "more reliable" than people feared, and
that people made a
big deal out of nothing. There was even a subtle ridicule for people who
spent much time and money in preparation. This is more a knee-jerk reaction
of the humanist mentality. We must realize that the Mass Media is merely a
business (like McDonald's) but with an agenda to gear
people's thoughts
along a false way of thinking while fostering movements that are basically
anti-Christian.
One of the false ways of thinking is the principle of "the end
justifies the means". This is a humanistic principle. Notice that if
disasters DO strike, the humanist would say that those who prepared were
wise, but if the Y2K creates no major problems, the tendency would be to
ridicule those who prepared for the worst, saying that they were basically
foolish or even paranoid. But this is a false humanistic
way of thinking.
Catholics know that it is either wise and prudent to prepare for disaster,
or it is not....regardless of the outcome. In the
present historical
circumstance, it was indeed prudent to fear the Y2K bug as professional
programmers themselves have warned, and even the Red Cross encouraged
people to prepare for. The United States would not have spent over 100
billion dollars to prepare and upgrade computer hardware and software for
nothing. But since no individual person anywhere could ever possibly know
for sure how well "someone else" had done their job, it was a prudent
measure to prepare for personal disaster just as it is to fear the
potential of a forest fire in the dry season with so many campers. In fact,
with the dependency we all have
in society for the necessities of life and health, even without the Y2K bug
we should realize that preparations for
being independent in society is a wise and prudent thing. Gone are the days
when all men could easily obtain food from local farmers, water from local
wells and wood for cooking & heat in their own
fireplaces while knowing how
to launder and bathe - without modern conveniences and dependence on
others. Gone are the days when all men did not rely on the police for
personal, immediate, bodily protection.
Fortunately, the immediate reaction of the Mass Media was seen to
change rapidly to more reasonable considerations within days, likely
because they saw the foolishness of praising computers without reference to
the fact that they are only as good as the people behind them. The smooth
transition did not signify that people were deluded with fear. No. It
signified that all the preparations of time and money to eradicate the bug
were quite successful. The fear necessarily remained
because each
individual could not possibly know whether every other individual in
society had done things correctly on their part. It was wise to prepare for
the worst. But there will nevertheless be some people (among those who
would not prepare) who will say in so many words, "I told you so." But
this foolishness is like someone who insists of having a picnic even though
the weatherman said that there was a 60% chance of rain, and then, when it
does not rain, say to the person who cancelled their
picnic, "I told you
so."
Let us fear this unreasonable mentality like the plague. Many
worldlings also take this attitude towards preparation for death, never
worrying about staying in the state of grace. They either try to convince
themselves that they will have time shortly before death to prepare, or
else try to convince themselves that there is no need to think of the
afterlife...almost taking an "I told you so" attitude before it is
time! What will such people do with their lives in the face of the
possibility of hell?
The same people who ridicule "preparations for a disaster" must realize
that they do the SAME thing year after year with various insurance
payments! These are made not on the probability of something happening, but
on the mere "possibility". And, if nothing happens that year, there is
nothing to show for all the money spent! However, it is entirely different
with those Y2K preparations: the computers and software that are upgraded
make businesses more efficient regardless of what happens. The food and
supplies that may have been stored can still be used, and people have
learned to be more independent and prepared for future disasters that may
strike. Nothing really lost, but something most certainly gained.
And, what can we say of this talk about whether "too much" money was
spent by the U.S. Government in preparation? Why does the Mass Media make
this an issue when it is common knowledge that the
Government is known for wasting the taxpayers' money to fund hundreds of
foolish and even sinful
projects all year round? Why wonder now whether too much was spent on THIS
Y2K project? And, even more so in light of the following Y2K issue
reported by the "Washington Post":
__________________________________________________________
Throughout Friday evening, Pentagon officials told members of the news
media that the change to the year 2000 was proceeding without a hitch
throughout the defense establishment. But yesterday the same officials
revealed that a major computer failure occurred shortly after 7 p.m.
EST--which is midnight Greenwich Mean Time, the time standard for many
satellite systems.
A ground-based computer system that processes information from a major
satellite intelligence network failed after 2000 began at Greenwich Mean
Time, and the military lost the ability to collect data from the
satellites, Deputy Defense Secretary John J. Hamre said yesterday at a
Pentagon news conference.
"We did have one significant problem, one that I had wished we hadn't had,
but we did," Hamre said. "One of our intelligence
systems, a
satellite-based intelligence system, experienced some Y2K failures last
night shortly after the rollover of Greenwich Mean Time. And for a period
of several hours, we were not able to process information from that
system."
__________________________________________________________
In light of this fact....should we not be asking rather, "Did we spend
ENOUGH money?". Such a serious failure has not been given enough coverage
in the news. It should make the headlines. Should we make a sigh of relief
that this did not result in any further disasters in the
world? Who can
say whether this bug was not purposely left in place? Can we rule out
espionage? Can we say for sure that no enemies or terrorists in the world
took advantage of the several hours of "down time" to
move some military
equipment into strategic positions? Will the future reveal that this
serious failure really did cause harm to the security of the Free
World? These are questions that should be asked by the Press...not whether
we spent "too much" money! The words of Pope Pius XI in 1937 come to mind
again: "A third powerful factor in the diffusion of communism is the
conspiracy of silence on the part of a large section of the non-Catholic
press of the world."
Asking whether we spent "enough" money is not simply based on the fact
that a major US government satellite-based intelligence
system failed, but that there are indeed many Y2K problems occurring that do
not make it to
the Press. The following excerpts from "The Andover News Network" speak
plainly and realistically on this matter:
__________________________________________________________
Jack Bryar, January 5th "Post Aramageddon Letdown"
"a whole lot of systems....failed. But you're not going to hear about
it.
The fact is, that unless a glitch had taken down the financial markets
or the power grid, no one was likely to tell the world they'd screwed up
unless they were forced to. If your company experienced trouble, were they
going to tell if they didn't have to?
When my local ISP went down on the evening of the 31st (and it's still
down) they didn't issue a press release. And when nearby power company sent
teams out to look at their snazzy new off peak electric meters on the
evening of the 31st they didn't issue a press release either."
"The Y2K failures are with us, but no one's talking if they can avoid
the embarrassment, not to mention the possible lawsuits.
This is 'kind of' excusable when the problems were minor affairs, but
they weren't all minor. It wasn't minor when the Defense Department lied to
the public when the computer that monitors defense satellites failed.
Perhaps they felt they didn't have a choice about downplaying the problem,
but that's the point: No one talks about failures if
they can avoid it. The
standard policy in most institutions when confronted with a problem is to
bury it as deeply as possible, make happy talk and buy time. So when a
couple of nuclear plants experienced "minor" glitches we'll have to take
their word for it. Same with the "minor" problem experienced by a Japanese
power facility."
"So all of the excitement is over. The reporters have left. And the Y2K
bug will still take up the time of system managers around the world. But
what's one more bug to clean up among the usual set of balky hardware,
buggy code, bad system designs and obsolete equipment that would get
attention of managers anyway? This problem, like many others, will be
annoying. It will crash systems at embarrassing moments, and it will
require additional clean up work to fix properly. Life will go on. And if
systems go down during the course of the year, it's likely to be passed off
to the public as a minor glitch, if it's acknowledged at all."
__________________________________________________________
A LESSON TO LEARN
From all this we should learn that the Mass Media will lead us away
from truth. We should learn to love the truth and study the truth so that
we may more easily recognize the errors of the day. We should learn that
this prospective disaster may be a merciful means used by Divine Providence
to awaken in us thoughts of our frailty and dependence; thoughts of our
final end and how we should remain prepared both materially and
spiritually. We should learn that this ever worsening condition of the
world has its solution in doing what we can, personally, to sanctify
ourselves using the ordinary means of the sacraments.
More particularly, today, we need to heed the warnings of Our Lady of
the Rosary in 1917 and to follow the Divine message given us at that time
for the solution of the world's problems, especially devotion to the
Immaculate Heart of Mary and the daily recitation of the Rosary. Let us not
fall into the attitude, "I can't make a difference; what can I do." The
problems of the world are due to sin and error. Our prayers and good works
can effect great changes. This is one reason why St.
Therese of the Child
Jesus and of the Holy Face was called by St. Pope Pius X, "the greatest
Saint of modern times" - to show that a person hidden away and unknown to
the world can effect great changes by personal sanctification and prayer.
-------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.
To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
For archives
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
