FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-13-2003, 10:55 PM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,505
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rational BAC
Exactly when did BCE and CE replace BC and AD?
From the Wikipedia:

The usage of CE to replace AD is usually advocated on the grounds that the counting of years in relation to the birth of Jesus is biased too strongly in the service of Christianity.

The earliest known use of the term CE is in Lindo's 1838 Jewish Calendar.


-Mike...
mike_decock is offline  
Old 06-13-2003, 10:59 PM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Silver City, New Mexico
Posts: 1,872
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by emotional
James Ussher, primate (!) of Ireland, calculated the 4004 BC date. His contemporary John Lightfoot fixed the time and date of creation at 9 AM on the 23rd of October. They both lived in the 17th century, BG - Before Geology destroyed the whole nice scheme.
Ussher was most likely serious. His calculations are primarily based on all those begats in Genesis.

It is very possible that Lightfoot's exact date and time was tongue in cheek. Lightfoot was a professor at Oxford. The year he made that pronouncement, the fall semester began at 9 AM on the 23rd of October.
wade-w is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 07:29 AM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,570
Default

Just for grins and giggles, what is todays stardate? How would a stardate calendar be used? I was born dec 10 1971; what is the stardate for it?

We can start our own scientific calendar. One that doesnt have the religious undertones to it. I'm tired of measuring 'time' with the birth of a dead, bearded guy. Lets show earth time for what it is...millions of years, not 2004.
Primordial Groove is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 07:37 AM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: 6th Circle of Hell
Posts: 1,093
Default

Woo! I can't wait until the new year! Happy 4,534,725,305!
Spaz is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 08:17 AM   #25
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Boxing ring of HaShem, Jesus and Allah
Posts: 1,945
Default

I kind of like the Unix epoch. Unix machines keep time by counting the seconds that passed since 00:00:00 1 Jan 1970. That's the Unix epoch. Using a 32-bit signed integer, which has a range of 2 billion (plus 2 billion negative), the epoch count holds valid until sometime in 2038, then it becomes negative and shifts back to 1902. Unix's own version of the Y2K problem. But this is going to be even less than the real Y2K, because by 2038 the time variable will most probably use 64 bits.

The MS-DOS epoch is 1 Jan 1980. That's the date you get when you reset the BIOS.

The Jewish epoch is the creation of the world in 3760 BCE. Yes, the Jewish rabbis used a Biblical calculation just like Archbishop Ussher did, but reached a different creation date. Jews use a lunar calendar with correction (intercalation) to fit the solar seaons - an extra month added in 7 years out of 19 (in the 3rd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 17th and 19th years to be accurate).

The Islamic epoch is Muhammad's emigration from Mecca, the Hijra, in 622 CE. The Islamic calendar is pretty useless, though, because it is wholly lunar with no synchronisation with the seasons. We're now at year 1424 after the Hijra, which in solar terms should be 2046 CE. Pathetic.

I wouldn't mind a more scientific dating method than the Christian-based one, but the latter has now become a legacy standard. I can't even think but in terms of the Gregorian date when I recall history dates.
emotional is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 02:24 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Bay area
Posts: 3,471
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mike_decock
From the Wikipedia:

The usage of CE to replace AD is usually advocated on the grounds that the counting of years in relation to the birth of Jesus is biased too strongly in the service of Christianity.

The earliest known use of the term CE is in Lindo's 1838 Jewish Calendar.


-Mike...
Thanks Mike. That was very interesting. But it does not explain in any way why in the last 10 (possibly 15 years) but I don't think much longer than that----------that all the little kiddies in our culture have been "mandated" to change previous thinking about AD and BC.

And it won't take very long. Another 20 years or so if you say BC and AD most people will look at you like you are speaking a foreign language. Little children are so malleable you know.

What bothers me and I hope what bothers all of the rest of you ----is that this "mandated change" came from the top down and not from the masses up as language change is wont to do.

I do not like "big brother" controlling my language. Do you?

Aren't any of you the least bit curious about this latest "big brotherism"?

It scares me all to hell.

I can be a very stubborn old phart. I will always refuse to use the CE and BCE designations until the day I die, and instead I will always use AD and BC. I do not like to be told from "the big boss" (whoever the big boss happens to be) how I should think or express myself.

In the same token and for the same reason, I will NEVER say "under God" when saying the Pledge.

And when some young whipper-snapper laughs at me 10 or 20 years from now when I still am saying AD and BC--- for being so "old fashioned and so politically incorrect"------

-----I will be quite happy to tell them to stick it up their buttts, that THEY were a victim of propoganda indoctrination and they are FOOLS---and have no mind at all besides what "big brother" tells them.

I have nothing against language change from the masses up.-----------it is a very natural occurance. I ABHOR language change from the top down.
Rational BAC is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 02:43 PM   #27
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gone
Posts: 4,676
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rational BAC
Thanks Mike. That was very interesting. But it does not explain in any way why in the last 10 (possibly 15 years) but I don't think much longer than that----------that all the little kiddies in our culture have been "mandated" to change previous thinking about AD and BC.
Who said the kiddie are "mandated" to change anything?


Quote:
What bothers me and I hope what bothers all of the rest of you ----is that this "mandated change" came from the top down and not from the masses up as language change is wont to do.
I do not like "big brother" controlling my language. Do you?
Who said "big brother" is changing anything? You can continue to say whatever you want,but you have to remember that we are no longer in the dark ages and we are no longer "mandated" to pay homage to your godman everytime someone mentions what day or year it is.

If anything "came from the top down" it was Anno Domini,but oddly this doesn't seem to bother you at all.
Yellum Notnef is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 02:56 PM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Bay area
Posts: 3,471
Default

The little kiddies were mandated and are right now learning the "new way"---------and the old way will be gone within a generation.

This bothers me a lot. I do not understand why anyone would not be incensed by such blatant and obvious indoctrination.

And is working, and it will work quite well. Shades of Hitler's 3rd Reich. I find it disgusting. And you should too.

Language should never be mandated from above.
Rational BAC is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 03:04 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Bay area
Posts: 3,471
Default

All of which reminds me. ------

I will also NEVER pronounce celtic with a "K" sound.

That was also fairly recently "mandated" by the "powers that be." It was a French word. Most of the Celts were originally of French origin. And there is no way that "c" followed by "e" can ever be anything but an "s" sound.

Anglo-Saxon basstards want to rule the world. But they are seriously incorrect on this one.

I say to all the "controllers of language" to just stick it up their buttts. I will never conform.
Rational BAC is offline  
Old 06-14-2003, 03:14 PM   #30
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gone
Posts: 4,676
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rational BAC
The little kiddies were mandated and are right now learning the "new way"---------and the old way will be gone within a generation.
The "old way" was biased towards your religion. You don't like "under god" in the pledge,but you're not at all bothered that "year of our lord" (aka Jesus) is the officially mandated way we mark time?

Quote:
This bothers me a lot. I do not understand why anyone would not be incensed by such blatant and obvious indoctrination.
CE is secular and does not honor or promote any particular religion. Indoctrination,otoh,would be if someone were to tell us all that we now have to say things like "Today is the 14th day of June in the year of our lord".
This is exactly how it was for a long time,but now we've moved away (a bit) from superstitious thinking and religious control,but we are still stuck with the initials for "year of our lord" (A.D.)




Quote:
And is working, and it will work quite well. Shades of Hitler's 3rd Reich. I find it disgusting. And you should too.

Language should never be mandated from above.
I fail to see anything rational here.
Yellum Notnef is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:52 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.