26-09-2001 23:03									#31
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Haupt. Dietrich You know it's pretty sad that people are all uppity about the date system. BC/AD is the way it has been and the way it should be period. The BCE/CE date system is the same thing only it doesn't offend atheists. Given what's going on in the world today it's just petty to flip your lid because you see BC/AD. There's too many other petty little things that bother people. Does it really matter? Ask yourself, does political correctness/incorrectness really matter in the end? Live and let be. We got other beastly things to worry about like terrorism.

Speaking as someone who is 1) Not an athiest and 2) isn't uppity, I must stress that the BCE/CE method of dating history has nothing to do with mollifying atheists. It is about incorporating non-European histories into a global view of history. To do this, we must take into account that most of the world is not of Judeo-Christian background. I think the BCE/CE method is the easiest way of avoiding massive overhauls of the dating system while still acknowledging history is written by all who participate, not just Europeans.

	26-09-2001 23:06									#32
	Got spare money?

Doesn't really matter to me. Whatever they choose, you can change the text file if you don't like it. It's not like it changes the gameplay or anything.

	27-09-2001 00:00									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

like i said before, it doesnt really matter.

Last edited by jdd2007 on 27-09-2001 at 20:11

	27-09-2001 01:41									#34
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by fluffy Thinking about it, why isn't his birthyear 0AD, as '1AD' means 'one year after his birth' and '1BC' means 'one year before his birth?? Seems like there is a year missing....

The Roman culture didn't "have" the number 0. So, there was never a year 0, and Jesus was born on 1AD.
That is also the explanation to why the 21st century didn't begin until 2001. If there had been a year 0, the 21st century would have started on 2000.

	27-09-2001 03:58									#35
	Remove this text

you guys are taking this poll too sreriously.. this poll is a joke, i suggested it on the other forum as a joke, and the person who posted it knows it is a joke. how come you cant see it!?

	27-09-2001 06:01									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by PGM The Roman culture didn't "have" the number 0. So, there was never a year 0, and Jesus was born on 1AD. That is also the explanation to why the 21st century didn't begin until 2001. If there had been a year 0, the 21st century would have started on 2000.

I would also like to mention that Jesus was not, in fact, born in 1 AD. He was born sometime between 4 BC and 6 BC. Gregory screwed up his arithmetic in divising his calendar and got the year wrong. So technically we should be in the year 2005 to 2007 right now.

Cheers.

	27-09-2001 12:02									#37
	Inflate your Upload Space

edited

Last edited by fluffy on 27-09-2001 at 12:07

	27-09-2001 12:04									#38
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by dainbramaged13 you guys are taking this poll too sreriously.. this poll is a joke, i suggested it on the other forum as a joke, and the person who posted it knows it is a joke. how come you cant see it!?

It's kinda scary to see all those people taking this poll that seriously

	27-09-2001 13:12									#39
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by dainbramaged13 you guys are taking this poll too sreriously.. this poll is a joke, i suggested it on the other forum as a joke, and the person who posted it knows it is a joke. how come you cant see it!?

He's right.

But you can post a poll here about anything and people will get into a historical argument. It's entertainment. So just sit back and enjoy the show.

	27-09-2001 13:26									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Well, I vote for BC/AD, but I won't argue with Boris, considering his signature....

	27-09-2001 13:42									#41
	Remove this text

come to think of it, BC/AD makes no sense at all. I've played games where I changed the tech paradigm to 100/10 and hadn't researched monotheism till the year 1500 or so. How could Christ have walked on the earth if there wasn't monotheism? I mean, he could have walked there, but he wouldn't be "christ" as in son of the one and only God.

	27-09-2001 13:46									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by campmajor! Well, I vote for BC/AD, but I won't argue with Boris, considering his signature....

hehe

	27-09-2001 15:27									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov BCE/CE is now the standard and accepted method of date notation among historical scholars. It is done because "Before Christ" is meaningless to 3/5ths of the world. I think, being a historical simulation of many different civs, CIV3 should either do the BCE/CE or simply start at year 1 and go to 6000, as someone else said on another board.

I couldn't agree more! Using CE will make "our" time scale more palatable to those with other systems -- Muslims, Jews, Chinese, ... -- and also to the growing numbers of atheists and agnostics in the Western world. Time measuring is fundamental and universal; it should no longer reflect religious bias. CIV, of all games, should be neutral and universal, and therefore adopt CE.

	27-09-2001 15:54									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by campmajor! Well, I vote for BC/AD, but I won't argue with Boris, considering his signature....

You are just jealous of my irrefutable, magnificent and airtight logic and reasoning power. Bask in my sunshine!

Hee.

	27-09-2001 15:55									#45
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Talking about the timescale...why don't the whole world not change to a whole new kind of date, which means today is year 0 and there are 3 sundays a week

	27-09-2001 16:30									#46
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by ADG Talking about the timescale...why don't the whole world not change to a whole new kind of date, which means today is year 0 and there are 3 sundays a week

For that matter, we could all be like the French and work 3 days a week.

	27-09-2001 16:54									#47
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by fluffy Thinking about it, why isn't his birthyear 0AD, as '1AD' means 'one year after his birth' and '1BC' means 'one year before his birth?? Seems like there is a year missing....

Because when the Julian calendar years were renumbered to use Christ's birth as the starting point, Europeans did not have, nor could they conceive of, the number zero. The number zero and the base ten numbering system were not adopted in Europe until the fourteenth century. Thus there is no Year 0.

It was my understanding that historians have placed the events described in Luke 2:1-2 in the year 4 BCE.

	27-09-2001 17:39									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dugrik Because when the Julian calendar years were renumbered to use Christ's birth as the starting point, Europeans did not have, nor could they conceive of, the number zero. The number zero and the base ten numbering system were not adopted in Europe until the fourteenth century. Thus there is no Year 0. It was my understanding that historians have placed the events described in Luke 2:1-2 in the year 4 BCE.

Also, "Anno Domini" does not mean after birth. It means "In the Year of Our Lord." So 1 AD is the first year of Our Lord.

According to J.M. Roberts' excellent A History of the World (Penguin publishers, highly recommend it), there still is not a consensus, and likely never will be. A lot of people say 4 BCE because it makes it nice and pat that Jesus would have been 33 in 30 CE, when he was crucified, and the Bible says he was in his 33rd year.

	27-09-2001 17:47									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

JellyDonut?

Is chow allowed in the barracks Pvt. Pyle? Are you allowed to eat jelly donuts Pvt. Pyle?

	27-09-2001 19:16									#50
	Put an end to popups!

Use the Jewish calendar!

	27-09-2001 19:22									#51
	BCE/CE Get a bigger avatar today!

AD - Anno Domini - "in the year of our lord"
Well he isn't my lord. I can't say, "The year is 2001 AD.", because this means "2001 in the year of our lord". 2001 CE is fine with me.

BC - Before Christ. Christ isn't a name or a title. It means the messiah as foretold in the old testament. Even using BC concedes a religeous point, I'm not willing to concede (ie That Jesus was Christ.) If you are a jew you believe christ hasn't come yet. Atheists don't even believe he will ever exist. Only christians concede Jesus was Christ. Implicit in this term is an inherent belief in Christianity. BCE works fine for me.

AD/BC aren't used in large parts of the world. Perhaps firaxis will change it to BCE/CE in some of its country customizations. I hope they do it for the American release, as it really shouldn't confuse anyone.

This isn't political correctness. It is courtesy. Not calling a person on the street f*ckface or religeous freak isn't political correctness either. It is also common manner/coutesy.

	27-09-2001 19:48									#52
	Tired of ads?

quote: This isn't political correctness. It is courtesy. Not calling a person on the street f*ckface or religeous freak isn't political correctness either. It is also common manner/coutesy.

Of course it's PC. It's PC in the same way as saying "African American" instead of "Negro".
Political correctness is appropriate in some cases, but in other it's just plain silly.

	27-09-2001 21:42									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Gangerolf ... as BCE/CE seems to be some hypocritical political correct bullshit (no offense).

I fail to see how its hypocritical. And I still fail to see how its politically correct. I think the term you were searching for is just "correct".

	27-09-2001 22:03									#54
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Just curious......

Has this discussion ever been debated before? What I mean is, has the BC/BCE AD/CE issue ever been debated at all at anytime in history other than the past 3 years with such passion in the Western World?

	27-09-2001 22:17									#55
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Haupt. Dietrich Just curious...... Has this discussion ever been debated before? What I mean is, has the BC/BCE AD/CE issue ever been debated at all at anytime in history other than the past 3 years with such passion in the Western World?

Yes, repeatedly, bitterly, ad nauseum.

But, among historians, BCE/CE seems to be winning out.

	27-09-2001 22:41									#56
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I object to our "common era" being defined by the supposed date of birth of a historical figure who might or might not have existed, and who certainly has been more divisive than uniting. In what way is the age after the 11th of Nivôse in MDCCXCI before the Revolution any way the start of said "common era"?

Vive Le Calendaire Jacobien!

	28-09-2001 04:38									#57
	Whoa... Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: I object to our "common era" being defined by the supposed date of birth of a historical figure who might or might not have existed

Hold on there, partner!

If you're referring to Jesus, there is no historical doubt that he did indeed exist. Jesus was certainly a real man. He is documented in more than just the Bible...Roman records refer to him, as do local Hebrew records.

The question is a theological one (his divinity), not his reality.

Cheers.

	28-09-2001 06:25									#58
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Put Common Era in. I don't mind. It'll seem strange to me, being raised with BC/AD, but it won't change the game any. It can probably be edited anyway.

	28-09-2001 10:20									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I'd just go with starting the game at year 0 and counting upwards. What calender is used within the year isn't really important since Civ doesn't deal with time periods <1 year. However, mods of the game certainly will so the game should be customizable to use any calendar system it wants.

--
Jared Lessl

	28-09-2001 12:55									#60
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Snapcase I object to our "common era" being defined by the supposed date of birth of a historical figure who might or might not have existed, and who certainly has been more divisive than uniting. In what way is the age after the 11th of Nivôse in MDCCXCI before the Revolution any way the start of said "common era"? Vive Le Calendaire Jacobien!

Had I known a fellow revolutionary were among us, I might have wished you Bonne Année earlier this week.

Liberté! Egalité! Fraternité!