Log in

No account? Create an account
My Tree thanks to slodwick

Anonymously Famous

Don't Call Me Kevie

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
Guh - lamardeuse
This has been annoying me for a bit now, and I'm wondering if it's either me just me being incredibly pedantic, or I'm the one who's got it all wrong.

An old hospital (118 years) was almost burned down the other day. The news reporter said that they lost the second story of the building but the firefighters managed to save the first floor, where there were records in storage from the turn of the century.

Turn of the century. So, what, the records are 4 years old? Shouldn't they be saying from the turn of last century, or records dating over 100 years, or things from the turn of the 20th Century?

Please, if I'm wrong, let me know, but I honestly thought a new century started 2000 (or 2001 if you're of that mindset.)

  • 1
You're not wrong. The turn of the century was 2001. And yep, they misspoke meaning the turn of *last* century. But really, the thought looms, why keep hundred-year old documents on site? Couldn't they better use that space for new equipment than old paper on people who have already lived and died? If they want to archive it, fine, but keeping it all in the hospital is not a good use of space that could be used better for patient's benefits.

I'm just sayin'.

Glad to hear I'm right! ;-)

As to where they kept the records, what you speak of is logic in an unlogical world. Sure, xray machines, and sterilisation equipment might sound good, but they're not as purty as old records.

  • 1