As the Year2000 Project manager for my company, I have been hearing rumors that the Year2000 is and some agruements that it is not a Leap Year. The typical standard that I understand is, every four years we add one day (ie. February 29th). It seems that rumors indicate that every 400 years (ie. Century's divisible by 400) are leap years and that century's not divisible by 400 are not leap years. Thus, 2000 is a leap year and 1900 is not a leap year.

Can you confirm this rumor or provide a different rational?

Leon Flood

-- Anonymous, January 05, 1998

Answers

Year 2000 is definately a leap year. There are those who are postulating that the leap year aspect of Y2K could be a bigger problem than all of the coded 00's. I don't know if I completely subscribe to that particular theory, but it is certainly another aspect of the Y2k problem that needs to be reviewed. It's just another fly in ointment that's already sticky.

For more information on confirmation that 2000 is a leap year, please see Dr. John Stockton's website, http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/misctime.htm

-- Anonymous, January 05, 1998

I concur, Y2K is a leap year. Here is second confirmation from Royal Greenwich Observatory

-- Anonymous, January 21, 1998