Year 0

vincent1989 said:
yes, by the Julian and Gregorian calenders, but there are others, including the astronomical calender that does use a 0, therefore you are not quite right ;)
Click to expand...

If someone talks about it being the year 2009, they're talking about our calender. There is no year 0 in our calender. Waffling on about other calenders is utterly irrelevant.


edit: if you'd actually read the thread, done some studying or not just assumed you were right then we wouldn't be having this discussion :)
Click to expand...

I did read the thread.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
LOOK WHAT YOU HAVE DONE TO OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM LABOUR!!
Click to expand...

:D

Its all done with purpose actually! If people forget what BC and AD is all about, they may go for a new year zero relative time of when new labour came to power, hence, BL and AL(before/after labour) instead. For instance, this way year 1 = year 1996 which is a massive denomination and therefore providing a great record for the party when it comes to fighting inflation...should have just left this post with a smilie actually...
 
vincent1989 said:
because modern translation of ancient documents is done in our time scale, we owe BC to bede and AD to Dionysus

there is no 0 in the gregorian or julian calenders, only the astronomical (and Buddhist and Hindu)

and jesus was most likely born around 3BC (whether you believe he was a miracle worker or not there is enough evidence to suggest jesus existed)
Click to expand...


Got to LOL, all of your posts use wikipedia.... im sure thats plagiarism.
 
janesssssy said:
Got to LOL, all of your posts use wikipedia.... im sure thats plagiarism.
Click to expand...

and? i'd rather look something up to make sure i'm right rather than spout off and look like a complete idiot (FYI i already knew *most* of the info I posted, but wiki puts in more concisely and I don't give a **** if you believe me or not :))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom