What does /his/ think of the The Holocene calendar? https:/

>>3341710
Too much work to make the adjustment.

>>3341710
its gay and retarded as fuck. theres literally no point to it.

>>3341710
Seems kind of points. AD and BC already work. (Or CE AND BCE, if your gay)

It's for fedoraians who want to use something more inconvenient because they can't have even the slightest hint of anything Christ-related to smear their delicate feelings. The goal, of course, is to turn all of society onto using HE to create a world-wide safespace for athiests.

File: jaysus.jpg (318KB, 806x1279px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 806x1279px

>>3341710
I couldn't give less of a shit if chinks are offended by having to reference Christ in academia or whatever the "controversy" is, it's a little less retarded than CE AND BCE though.

>>3341710
its swapping one arbitrary point for 0 for another
so >>3341901 has the right of it

>>3341710
I think the earliest traceable date in history which is the first year of the first Akkadian king's reign is a better place to start and could be reffered to as before (the) record(ing of/ed) dates and after e.g brd, ard. It would be either more work to adjust to but at least has some solid grounding and avoids being Christo-centric but in turn becomes Akkado-centric but is also supported by limited knowledge available collectively possessed by the world. Also they should replace the Julian/Gregorian calendar with the one based on the slightly more accurate Iranian Solar Hijri calendar or the Ancient Bulgar calendar.

File: 15589938_703521503145120_3493259686708594744_n.jpg (113KB, 793x760px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 793x760px

>>3343351
For months I propose they be named after associated astrological signs though others could use simple numerical appellations if they want. And for days a reversion the Ancient Greek names of the days of the week but if others prefer they may use numerical designations also.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_days_of_the_week#Greco-Roman_tradition

>>3343405
>*And for days a reversion TO the Ancient Greek names

>>3342628
>its swapping one arbitrary point for 0 for another
Sentence doesn't make any sense lad.

Why don't we have a calender that simply starts on the date of the indisputable creation of the world by the Christian God on 18 March 3952 BC? That could be the year 0 CWCG.

The whole world only just made the gregorian calendar standard, and some fedora wants to change it again? no one's got time for that.

Anyone else hate this guy's presentation, feels like i'm being talked own to with the calming voice and the clean simple graphics.

>[current year] becomes 12017 HE
>12043 HE - archaeologists discover evidence of civilisation from 1050 BHE
>12043 HE becomes 13093 HE
>14138 HE - archaeologists discover new evidence...

>>3341710
I think we should go back to using the Olympics.

>>3341710
I don't care if the calendar starts in a completely random point as it does now (even if you're a christfag, you should know that the year is most certainly incorrect), because it is pretty much impossible to find an starting point that is both undisputed and universal (although Columbus' first voyage makes for a pretty compelling argument).

I just wish we could change the Gregorian calendar for a Lunisolar version of it.