Re: BC/AD vs BCE/CE

[Richard Yanowitz <ryanowit -at- NYCT -dot- NET>]

At 11:13 PM 11/2/97 +0100, E,T, Hull wrote:
>> another I dislike because it gives the illusion of resolving a problem
>that
>> remains unresolved; and at another, less savory, level my scholarly
>> background makes me feel more secure with the traditional BC/AD
>
>
>We live in the year 15,576,984,687 ABB (after the big bang)
>That should solve it.
>
>Although mayby some people may have problems remembering it.

Apparently so: it's actually 15,576,984,685 (revised last month after
analysis of data recovered from the Hubbell telescope).

Of course, this dating method may offend Christian or other fundamentalists
who have a non-big bang approach to creation...


_________________________________________________________
Richard Yanowitz, NYC
mailto:ryanowitz -at- bigfoot -dot- com

Freelance writers (including tech writers): join the National Writers Union
for contract help, grievances, health benefits, lobbying, community....

For further information, e-mail me or contact the union directly:
        web site: http://www.nwu.org/nwu/
        mailto:nwu -at- nwu -dot- org

Posts: mailto:techwr-l -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu
Commands: mailto:listserv -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu (e.g. SIGNOFF TECHWR-L)
Archives: http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html,
	http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/
Subjects: JOB:, QUESTION:, SUMMARY:, ANNOUNCE:, or none of these.