what year is it

the_pen_turner

hi there

our whole calendar system is based on ad and bc system


when we eventually get to a point where religion is in the minority what system should we use .

Orion

It's 2016CE

marmurr1916

Islam has its own calendar, as does Judaism. And the Thais have their own Buddhist calendar. It's 2559 according to the Thai calendar, 1437 according to the Muslim calendar and according to the Jewish calendar it's 5776.

The CE/BCE stuff is just nonsense - it's AD/BC renamed but the basis on which the years are worked out is exactly the same.

I've no time for fig leafs. It is what it is, why try to disguise it?

Pherekydes

It's 666+666+666+6+6+6.

:pac:

/seen on FB

Pherekydes

marmurr1916 wrote: »

The CE/BCE stuff is just nonsense - it's AD/BC renamed but the basis on which the years are worked out is exactly the same.

Before Christ/Anno Domini has no meaning for the majority of the world's population. CE/BCE are used because we are, literally, in the common era.

Samaris

Tbh, I'm fine with sticking with the current one, whether it's a relic or anachronism or not. After all, we still use September-December for the 9-12th months despite the words actually -meaning- Seven-Ten. We still use the days of the week without worrying about if we're incidentally commemorating Tir, Woden, Thor, Frig, the Roman god Saturn or Jesus.

I'm still okay with a month called after Janus, a month named after a Roman purification ritual, one commemorating a god of war and whatever April's about. And then there's Juno, Julius and Augustus Caesar...

Yeah, overall, I'm pretty alright with 2016 being the current year!

wench

Samaris wrote: »

Yeah, overall, I'm pretty alright with 2016 being the current year!

Ditto.

It was hard enough coding all the changes when George Bush decided to tinker with daylight savings time, changing the basis of the calendar would be a nightmare!

keith16

marmurr1916 wrote: »

1437 according to the Muslim calendar

LOL. It certainly is as far as they're concerned.

magicbastarder

i visited the museum in cheddar gorge two years ago, and there was a sign up apologising for the use of CE and BCE on their information displays. they explained that it's generally used in archaeological and scientific contexts, but seemingly the daily mail or some other newspaper had gotten hold of the fact that they used it and ran a 'THEY'RE TRYING TO WRITE JESUS OUT OF HISTORY' article. and they had lots of complaints.

i think the sign explained that saying 'AD 2016' would imply a level of accuracy of knowledge about events 2016 years ago which does not apply; CE 2016 does not specify a particular event from which you are measuring.

goose2005

Juche 105

Hotblack Desiato

the_pen_turner wrote: »

hi there

our whole calendar system is based on ad and bc system


when we eventually get to a point where religion is in the minority what system should we use .

Stardate.

seamus

At the end of the day any calendar or dating system will be based on counting from an arbitrary point in time, since we cannot precisely tell how many milliseconds have occurred since the big bang.

So sticking with the CE/BCE system makes just as much sense as any other.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

seamus wrote: »

At the end of the day any calendar or dating system will be based on counting from an arbitrary point in time, since we cannot precisely tell how many milliseconds have occurred since the big bang

So sticking with the BC/AD system makes just as much sense as any other?


wait till we have first contact with aliens, that will be year zero


(yes, there will be a year zero)

feargale

the_pen_turner wrote: »

hi there
our whole calendar system is based on ad and bc system
when we eventually get to a point where religion is in the minority what system should we use .

To give everyone a fair crack of the whip, take the Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist and French Revolutionary years. Add them together and divide by five.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

Pherekydes wrote: »

CE/BCE are used because we are, literally, in the common era.

???


(why not 1437 CE, or 2559 CE, or 5776 CE?)

feargale

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

???


(why not 1437 CE, or 2559 CE, or 5776 CE?)

Indeed, and why not add a few hundred to that next year?

Captain Chaos

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

???


(why not 1437 CE, or 2559 CE, or 5776 CE?)

Other countries around the world are not even on the CE system. Look at the likes of China or Iran.

You just pick a point and go from there, it's all relative anyway. Monitoring the passage of time is a human invention and time is not constant in the universe anyway.

Want to use star dates or atomic clocks, the speed of light between two fixed points?

Samaris

feargale wrote: »

To give everyone a fair crack of the whip, take the Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist and French Revolutionary years. Add them together and divide by five.

I was intrigued and decided to look them up.
It is currently

5776 AM (Anno Mundi/year of the world/since the world was created - Judaism)
2559 (Buddhist - since the death of Buddha)
2016 AD (Anno Domini)
1436 AH (Anno Hegirae - year of the Hijra/Mohammad's emigration to Medina)
CCXXIV (224 by a slightly dodgy version of the French Revolutionary calendar since they hadn't quite worked out the kinks in it by the time everyone stopped revolving and thus it breaks down a bit after 1802. Ah well.)

Sooo it's currently 2402 Anno Boardius.

antiskeptic

Pherekydes wrote: »

Before Christ/Anno Domini has no meaning for the majority of the world's population.

It actually does. The meaning has to do with the structure and focus of the Western world being so centred, historically, around Christianity. That meaning might be as welcome as the meaning behind the word 'Crusade' for some, but meaning it most certainly has.

Those parts of the world which have alternative dating systems (and good luck to them) won't alter their systems because of CE, will they

CE/BCE are used because we are, literally, in the common era.

What on earth is the common era (other than being akin to taking the Christ out of Xmas activities)? I wonder how much it cost to come up with the title?

Unlike such Christ out of xmas activity (which stuffs more food and presents into the hole left behind by the extraction) CE/BCE is, as someone pointed out upstream, a transparent, hollow fig leaf. Why would a self respecting atheist use such a system?

seamus

antiskeptic wrote: »

Those parts of the world which have alternative dating systems (and good luck to them) won't alter their systems because of CE, will they

Not traditionally, but since CE is the international standard (like UTC), anyone who wants to engage with the rest of the world in a meaningful way has to use it. When you're shipping something from China to the US with DHL, what dating system do they use on the packages?

What on earth is the common era (other than being akin to taking the Christ out of Xmas activities)? I wonder how much it cost to come up with the title?

In reality these postfixes have little relevance outside of of the historical sciences. Write AD if you like, but most people are going to leave it off unless they're specifically discussing events which could have happened more than 2016 years ago.
Since religious reference doesn't have any purpose in science, it makes sense in those contexts to use CE over AD.

Why would a self respecting atheist use such a system?

Why wouldn't they? All calendars are arbitrary - sticking a finger in the air and declaring that point in time to be "zero". So why would anyone decide on a new arbitrary point in time instead of just using the one that's in majority use?
Even the year itself is arbitrary - 1st January doesn't have any cosmological significance. Logically it would make more sense for 1st January to be the day on which a solstice occurs - year lengths would then be self-correcting. But nope, we use the system that we're used to. Because it's all arbitrary in the end.

antiskeptic

seamus wrote: »

Not traditionally, but since CE is the international standard (like UTC), anyone who wants to engage with the rest of the world in a meaningful way has to use it. When you're shipping something from China to the US with DHL, what dating system do they use on the packages?

CE of course. They'll conform to the international standard just as they did to AD/BC. No difference because of the rebranding.

In reality these postfixes have little relevance outside of of the historical sciences. Write AD if you like, but most people are going to leave it off unless they're specifically discussing events which could have happened more than 2016 years ago.
Since religious reference doesn't have any purpose in science, it makes sense in those contexts to use CE over AD.

If there is no quantitative or qualitative difference between AD and CE it makes no difference which term you use, whether in science or in religion. You no more have to write AD on front of a discussion about the 1916 rising than you do CE.

It's a change that achieves nothing at all (bar inching forward with secularism in an illusionary way). You say it makes sense. Could you explain the sense?

Why wouldn't they? All calendars are arbitrary - sticking a finger in the air and declaring that point in time to be "zero". So why would anyone decide on a new arbitrary point in time instead of just using the one that's in majority use?
Even the year itself is arbitrary - 1st January doesn't have any cosmological significance. Logically it would make more sense for 1st January to be the day on which a solstice occurs - year lengths would then be self-correcting. But nope, we use the system that we're used to. Because it's all arbitrary in the end.

I meant: why would any self-respecting atheist bother switching from one term to another which has absolutely no different meaning. Inch to mm I can understand. Or pound to euro. But AD to CE?

-

wikipedia wrote:

Proponents of the Common Era notation assert that the use of BCE/CE shows sensitivity to those who use the same year numbering system as the one that originated with and is currently used by Christians, but who are not themselves Christian

I'm sure someone who is sensitive enough to be offended by what the letters AD actually stands for won't be fooled by the deck chairs being shifted around. Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet?

seamus

antiskeptic wrote: »

It's a change that achieves nothing at all (bar inching forward with secularism in an illusionary way). You say it makes sense. Could you explain the sense?

Think about what "AD" means when translated.

It implies reverence to a specific god. By default this makes it unsuitable for universal use.

There's also a scientific disconnect, since "BC" and "AD" imply that the before/after Christ dates we have are correct and exact. They're not, they're best guesses. "CE" and "BCE" are by implication based on an arbitrary point in time and don't imply the exactness of any specific event.

Which for historical sciences is pretty important.

Like I say, I don't really care if you use AD or CE, it makes no odds to most people. Why are you so opposed to it if it's just illusionary?

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

Samaris

I have no issues with CE and BCE; as previously mentioned, they're arbitrary points in time and we have to start -somewhere-.

As for the self-respecting atheist bit, bah, AD and BC is absolutely mere icing, it's hardly important. Does a self-respecting atheist have an issue with the days of the week or the months of the year? Does a self-respecting Catholic want to rename the days to omit references to ancient gods?

kierank01

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

So sticking with the BC/AD system makes just as much sense as any other?


wait till we have first contact with aliens, that will be year zero


(yes, there will be a year zero)

We should start counting now, so by my reckoning, it should be -47BV (before Vulcan*)

*I am aware that vulcan is the roman god of fire

Samaris

kierank01 wrote: »

We should start counting now, so by my reckoning, it should be -47BV (before Vulcan*)

*I am aware that vulcan is the roman god of fire

Ah sure, we can't be having that. Commemorating a heathen god, disgraceful altogether! Next thing is we'll be expected to worship it!

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

How about a compromise, we use CE / BCE, but let it stand for 'Christian Era', because that's what it is...

Nodin

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

How about a compromise, we use CE / BCE, but let it stand for 'Christian Era', because that's what it is...

....not in India, China and various other parts, no.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

Nodin wrote: »

....not in India, China and various other parts, no.

no, its 2559, or 1938, or Dog...

SEPT 23 1989

Is that the best they can do?

Attack the calender?

Pathetic

pauldla

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Is that the best they can do?

Attack the calender?

Pathetic

is it an attack on the calendar? Or is it an attempt to rectify a system of reckoning years so that it is a tad more inclusive and standardised? 'Attack' in this context is a curious choice of term, is it not? And who are 'they'?

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

Is there any difference at all between BC/AD and BCE/CE? They're not rectifying anything, just changing the label from 'Anno Domini' to Christian Era

Samaris

I don't think many people are taking it hugely seriously.

And no, there's no particular difference, it is just really changing the name.

looksee

Its supposed to be Common Era (whatever that is) rather than Christian, I think.

Keplar240B

By convention, all dates are relative to the Fall of the Twelve Colonies.


Events before the Fall are marked as "BCH", or "Before Cylon holocaust".

Events after the Fall are marked as "ACH", or "After Cylon holocaust".


.

The Cylon holocaust occurs 150,000 years ago.

The date,
Its 150,008 ACH

All of this happened before and all of this will happen again.

The Randy Riverbeast

Keplar240B wrote: »

By convention, all dates are relative to the Fall of the Twelve Colonies.


Events before the Fall are marked as "BCH", or "Before Cylon holocaust".

Events after the Fall are marked as "ACH", or "After Cylon holocaust".


.

The Cylon holocaust occurs 150,000 years ago.

The date,
Its 150,008 ACH

All of this happened before and all of this will happen again.

So say we all.

looksee

Can you abbreviate that to '08 when filling in dates? Be a bit of a pain trying to get it all into four spaces.

Samaris

looksee wrote: »

Can you abbreviate that to '08 when filling in dates? Be a bit of a pain trying to get it all into four spaces.

The real problem is when you tick over to 200,000ACH. The computers cannae take it anymore.

looksee

Samaris wrote: »

The real problem is when you tick over to 200,000ACH. The computers cannae take it anymore.

I don't think that will worry any of us too much.

Samaris

looksee wrote: »

I don't think that will worry any of us too much.

Isn't that what we thought prior to 2000? Look what happened there!

looksee

50,000 years? I really don't care

2768 Ab Urbe Condita

Absolam

A.L. 6016

Kev W

Samaris wrote: »

Isn't that what we thought prior to 2000? Look what happened there!

Absolutely nothing?

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

is there anything in the last 2000 years that we could consider the start point of a calender, a year zero?

endacl

We are in the depths of Backspindlewinter, shortly after Hogswatch, in the Year of the Spinning Mouse.

Perhaps the debate is a little silly?

The Randy Riverbeast

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

is there anything in the last 2000 years that we could consider the start point of a calender, a year zero?

My birth.

cowboyBuilder

at time of posting it's

1452768804