Why 14 ACE??

[King of Atlantis]

Sorry for going way of topic, but why change the terms for Before Christ etc, when you are still using a chrisian calander. It still revolves around the birth of Christ, so why try to change the name to hide its true identity....


Also i have never, heard of it as Befor/after cristian era.

In history books it is B.C.E(before common era) and AD has remained unchanged(atleast in mine, and according to my history teacher...).

[Simetrical]

I use BCE and CE because not only am I not a Christian, I'm an Orthodox Jew, and I would prefer not to refer to a year as "Year of Our Lord" or "Before the Messiah", even if it's in another language and abbreviated. It smacks of blasphemy, even though it obviously isn't actually blasphemy, even by Judaism's rather strict standards. As far as normal people go, yeah, I could see why you'd think it's overly PC.

BCE: Before the Christian Era
ACE:After Christian Era

ref:http://www.stands4.com/bc.asp?c=TIMEZONES

We are not, however, after the Christian era, we are in it. Thus "CE". If you consult a source that doesn't include every abbreviation anyone's ever used anywhere, such as the AHD, you will find CE but not ACE, because ACE is vanishingly rare. Only if you search something like Acronym Finder, which lists pretty much everything, will you ever find ACE. CE can be found in any authoritative general-purpose dictionary. Notice that the Wikipedia article you linked to doesn't even mention the variant.

Basically, ACE is really rare and logically makes no sense. Everyone uses CE.

in fact our english is gramatically more accurate than the native speakers themselves(A fact that repeats itself with all languages with non-native speakers being in a majority of cases gramatically more sound)

That comes as a surprise to me after having spoken to quite a number of Indian customer service representatives for various companies, but your English seems to be pretty good, certainly. According to this, "in the 1991 census, . . . about 11% of those polled . . . claimed that English was their first, second or third language." That suggests to me that either a) Indians tend to learn a ton of languages, or b) not many Indians are fluent in English, at least as of 15 years ago. Also, this says "English is spoken as a second language by somewhere between 50 and 250 million Indians", but not spoken as a primary or "native" language by pretty much anyone. It cites the Ethnologue, which is pretty reputable, although a cursory look at their website doesn't give me any useful info.