3 ms·
"Before Present" seems foolish. The document that uses it then has to then be dated. e.g. "I warmed up dinner one minute before present" ---> said ??? minutes
by inanutshellus 2y ago
"Before Present" seems foolish.
The document that uses it then has to then be dated.
e.g. "I warmed up dinner one minute before present" ---> said ??? minutes ago. --> is dinner still warm? who knows.
I get that "about 7,000 years ago" is still going to be "about 7,000 years" for a very long time.
Still. Seems shortsighted to communicate dates via a moving target, especially for something that's already supposed to be thinking in very long terms.
Archaeologists, you'd think, would expect their words to stick around a long, long time, why would they use a short-sighted dating mechanism?
- muscomposter 2y agoBritish Petroleum would beg to differ but it is getting silly, all these two-letter acronyms to indicate before or after the non-existing Julian or Gregorian year zero
- cassepipe 2y agoI like BCE and ACE because it's kind of backward compatible for my brain : You find the same B and A than the previous convention and I like that the CE makes it symmetrical. Common era is also a nice name humanity can get behind whereas my brain never fully accepted Anno Dominus or whatever. If you're going to refer to Christ, do it on both sides the same for Christ's sake ! So parsable, transparent and universal acronyms for the win !