Is it really 2017 or should it be 12,017 HE

[Namehere]

I've been watching a lot of science videos on Youtube - PBS Space Time and in this case Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell. One of the Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell video's was about something called the Holocene Calendar, by essentially adding ten thousand years to the current calendar. I found the argument quite compelling and wanted to see what others thought. Naturally the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czgOWmtGVGs

So what do you all think, was Cesare Emiliani idea for a Holocene Calendar a good one, or is just a waste of time/hot air?

 

[Sonmi]

Waste of time, no need to change a calendar we all understand.

A better argument for a new calendar was made by the Republicains during the French revolution, basing their whole conception of time around the number 10, which is far more logical than our current 60 sec/60 mins/24 hours/7 days/56 weeks system. Implementing it was tiresome, and didn't bring enough benefits for all the hurdles it brought with it, and so it was abandoned (among other things, political implications also need to be kept in consideration).

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I'm just waiting for the day the special snowflakes realize we're using the christian calendar and they start self-identifying by other calendars and timescales.

 

[Sonmi]

I'm just waiting for the day the special snowflakes realize we're using the christian calendar and they start self-identifying by other calendars and timescales.

That was the French Revolution.

It didn't catch on.

 

[Catnip1024]

Well, if you do that, how do you know it is exactly 10,000 years to add on? They weren't the best at record keeping, back then.

You may as well make the reference date something 100% completely pointless, so nobody can argue about it without looking petty. For example, we are currently in the Year 40 ASW (After Star Wars).

A better argument for a new calendar was made by the Republicains during the French revolution, basing their whole conception of time around the number 10, which is far more logical than our current 60 sec/60 mins/24 hours/7 days/56 weeks system. Implementing it was tiresome, and didn't bring enough benefits for all the hurdles it brought with it, and so it was abandoned (among other things, political implications also need to be kept in consideration).

I never heard much about how that actually worked. How did they get around weekends? Did people gain an extra day off, or just three more working days?

 

[Sonmi]

Well, if you do that, how do you know it is exactly 10,000 years to add on? They weren't the best at record keeping, back then.

You may as well make the reference date something 100% completely pointless, so nobody can argue about it without looking petty. For example, we are currently in the Year 40 ASW (After Star Wars).

A better argument for a new calendar was made by the Republicains during the French revolution, basing their whole conception of time around the number 10, which is far more logical than our current 60 sec/60 mins/24 hours/7 days/56 weeks system. Implementing it was tiresome, and didn't bring enough benefits for all the hurdles it brought with it, and so it was abandoned (among other things, political implications also need to be kept in consideration).

I never heard much about how that actually worked. How did they get around weekends? Did people gain an extra day off, or just three more working days?

Weekends and work weeks as we know them are a concept that really arose after the French Revolution.

Decadi, the tenth day of the decade (their version of the week) was a leisure day, though.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I'm just waiting for the day the special snowflakes realize we're using the christian calendar and they start self-identifying by other calendars and timescales.

People have been saying "CE" for Current Era and "BCE" for Before Current Era for years.

 

[Kolby Jack]

Traditions that are pointless AND cumbersome should be dropped, but for traditions that are pointless but harmless, who cares?

Besides, if the rapture happens and Jesus really does return some day, won't there be egg on all you HE advocates' faces!

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Traditions that are pointless AND cumbersome should be dropped, but for traditions that are pointless but harmless, who cares?

Besides, if the rapture happens and Jesus really does return some day, won't there be egg on all you HE advocates' faces!

No, because if Jesus was real (still iffy on the specifics of this) he'd tell you we got his birthday wrong. Like, really wrong.

 

[Riverwolf]

Might be useful for the sciences or Academia, but I don't really see the use of adopting such a thing colloquially.

Plus, if we find some other, similar structure dating to some earlier point in history, what then?

 

[Kolby Jack]

Traditions that are pointless AND cumbersome should be dropped, but for traditions that are pointless but harmless, who cares?

Besides, if the rapture happens and Jesus really does return some day, won't there be egg on all you HE advocates' faces!

No, because if Jesus was real he'd tell you we got his birthday wrong. Like, really wrong.

Which would explain why the rapture happens in the first place! "YOU ASSHOLES HAVE FORGOTTEN MY BIRTHDAY FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS!"

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Which would explain why the rapture happens in the first place! "YOU ASSHOLES HAVE FORGOTTEN MY BIRTHDAY FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS!"

Unlike you hipster douchebags, like a true conservative I chart the days from the pre-Gregorian calendar, and the start of the year is at the time of Mithras.

Or in dirty liberal speak, the vernal equinox.

Just so I don't get it wrong like you heathen scum.

(Edit) First hint is there is no 0 in Latin numerics.

Second hint is King Herod (Archelaus), the Emperor Tiberius and John's recounts of the beginning of his ministry.

Third hint is the Gospel of Luke (more so for the latter of the above).

Fourth hint is looking at the extant Roman dating system at the time.

Put it all together ... and you realize why it's a clustrefuck. All that is definite is 0 CE is bad math. There is no 0 CE. There never will be. If you say there was a year zero, you're wrong and you deserve to be slapped. We have a better idea of when the Holocene started than we do when (even if) Christ was born. So why not? It will be factually more accurate.

Alternatively we could go Buddhist and go a lunisolar siderealist perspective. Not very good at accurately charting the seasons, but whatever. It's more fun. Better measures the passage of celestial bodies at the tropics.

Useful if we become an interplanetary AND an interstellar species.

Then we can use "Stardate" and actually correspond it to the movement of celestial bodies across the heavens. You know, rather than being fascists and assuming Earth and its ceaseless turnings is so special.

 

[Hawki]

No, I'm fine with 2017. I don't want to start saying "12,017" in casual conversation - too many syllables. ;p

 

[Zontar]

No, I'm fine with 2017. I don't want to start saying "12,017" in casual conversation - too many syllables. ;p

Twelve Seventeen, not really much harder then Twenty Seventeen.

 

[Nickolai77]

It reminds me of people who replace 'CE' with AD and BCE with BC. Yes, many people aren't Christian these days, and the AD/BC dating system is very exclusive to Western culture, but I don't really approve of changing it because it will cause more confusion than its worth. In the end, Christians have had a huge influence on Western civilisation and the world in general, I don't agree with trying to cover that all up because Christianity isn't so relevant any more.

My main critique about the Holocene proposed calender is that we don't usually talk about dates in history older than 2000-3000 years, because in most cases that's how far back recorded history goes. It makes the first 9000 years of the Holocene Calender largely redundant, because we only have a vague idea of what was going on that long ago.

If we must change the calender, I'd humbly suggest re-adopting Ab Urbe Condita, AUC) and count years up from 753BC which was the alleged founding of Rome. Given that most historical events we talk about happened after 753BC, it may be handy not having to mentally count backwards when talking about events that happened before Jesus Christ was supposed to be born.

 

[GrumbleGrump]

It's just a bunch of hot air. No one is going to bother changing the way they see history (which is widespread and deeply ingrained) just to satisfy some academic technicality. It's 2017 and we probably won't be changing that unless the world gets absolutely fucked. Then we can start using "After First Impact" or whatever. I do hope we can star calling cities "Neo-Whatever", because I can't wait for Neo-Santiago and the roving packs of cyber-flaites.