In this series of lectures, world-leading synthetic organic chemist, Professor James Tour, takes on an internet troll who claims that scientists have discovered how life got started from simple chemicals on the primordial Earth. In this series of presentations, Dr. Tour explains, in exquisite technical detail, why scientists are really clueless about how life got started.
There is an old adage; you get what you pay for. Though there is more than a grain of truth to this, as I enter my third year exploring and enjoying the binocular market, I have found genuine exceptions to that time honoured maxim. There is such a thing as a great bargain binocular; that is, a solidly made instrument that offers a level of optical performance and ergonomics well above what you’d expect given its modest price tag. I have spoken in the past of the remarkable Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42, which punched well above its weight and left a lasting impression on this author. Here, I am delighted to present to you my evaluation of its higher power sibling; the Barr & Stroud Savannah 10 x 42.
Just a couple of years ago, I was a total binocular virgin, having little or no experience with these optical wonders, save for an honourable mention to an old 7 x 50 Porro prism instrument I acquired in my youth. Little did I know that, like telescopes, the binocular market has undergone a veritable revolution, thanks to astounding advances in technology and a great capitalist, competitive spirit among manufacturers, which collectively have both improved the quality of bargain instruments and driven prices down. As a case in point, take a look at this review, dating back to 2011, of the same 10 x 42 I’m about to assess here. The reader will note its retail price was about £200. Now you can get the same instrument at a significantly reduced outlay; typically just 60 per cent of the 2011 retail price!
The Barr & Stroud 10 x 42 was purchased from a reputable dealer, the Birder’s Store, in Worcester, England. I paid £124.99 for the instrument and it arrived a couple of days after making the purchase. In the past, I have bought many economically priced instruments from Amazon, but discovered that quite a few are what I would describe as greyware; that is, while the price looks good, the products quite often have some optical or mechanical fault that necessitates sending them back and getting a refund. It pays to go to a specialised dealer when purchasing binoculars, especially if you don’t have a chance to test them out in person.
The instrument arrived in perfect nick: I received the binocular, a lens cleaning cloth, a warranty card, a high quality logoed padded neck strap, a generic instruction sheet and a clamshell case.
First Impressions
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 10 x 42 is solidly built for a life in the great out of doors.
Being an identical build to the 8 x 42, the 10 x 42 Savannah is solidly constructed. The polycarbonate body is overlaid by textured green rubberised material that is easy to grip. While other enthusiasts have a tendency to look down on using polymers as the main housing, I personally don’t subscribe to that philosophy, being lucky enough to also own and use instruments that are constructed around aluminium and magnesium alloys. Indeed, I have encountered no hard evidence that instruments with a polycarbonate chassis are in any way inferior to those built around metallic alloys, despite the extensive hyperbole I’ve seen in online advertising and from other reviewers.
The central hinge is reassuringly stiff and maintains the correct inter-pupillary distance once adjusted. Though many of the more sophisticated models on the market have an open bridge design that enables the user to use it single-handedly, I fail to see why this would be important in a 10 x 42, as you’ll most definitely need both hands on deck to get a decently stable image at 10x.
One of the great features of this binocular, and Barr & Stroud instruments in general, are their wonderful focusers. This instrument is no exception; the focus wheel of which is covered in a textured rubber which is silky smooth to operate, with zero backlash, going through just over two full revolutions from one end of its focus travel to the other. Having sampled several binoculars from Barr & Stroud, I know that this is no accident; this company once enjoyed an illustrious history serving the British navy in two world wars, with all manner of optical accoutrement. And even though they have long since ceased to be an independent trader, the company having outsourced all their manufacturing to China, it is clear to me that some of the skills they acquired in putting together highly functional binoculars in the past are still in evidence! What’s more, I would rate this focuser higher than many binoculars I have purchased for a few hundred pounds more!
As you can see from the photo above, the dioptre ring is not located under the right ocular lens, as is the case in the vast majority of roof prism binoculars, but just ahead of the focus wheel. This does make adjusting the right barrel optics considerably easier than its more conventional counterpart, but, for the record, it would be remiss of me not to mention a malfunctioning dioptre ring on a Savannah 8 x 42 I once purchased second-hand.
The twist up eye cups are of very high quality. With two click stops, they hold their position firmly.
Another very nice feature of these economical binoculars is their eye cups. They are made from metal overlaid with soft rubber. They can be extended upwards with two click stops and hold their positions very firmly. Again, I would rate them as well above average, and more in keeping with eye cups I’ve seen on binoculars in the £200 to £250 range.
The objective lenses on the Barr & Stroud 10 x 42 are very deeply recessed. I measured them at about 8mm, which is good news, as this will afford greater protection of the objective in rainy and dusty environs, as well as acting as an effective shielding of stray light.
The objective lenses are very deeply recessed, protecting the glass against rain, dust and stray light.
Optical Testing
Attaching the instrument to a sturdy tripod, I was able to show that it arrived with very good collimation, with only a tiny vertical asymmetry between the left and the right barrels, which the eyes can easily accommodate for. Examining the exit pupil in a bright shaft of light showed that there was no truncation and no stray light leakage inside the field stop.
No truncation of the exit pupil and no stray light inside the field stop.
The good news continued when I performed my iPhone torch light test. Directing an intensely bright beam inside the binocular, and examining the image arriving at my eyes, I was delighted to see what I had reported before about these Savannah binoculars. The image was very clean, with no diffused light, a very subdued diffraction spike and a couple of very weak internal reflections. I deemed the result excellent and only a notch down from the same result I got from my Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 binocular, but a tad better than my smaller 10 x 25 Trinovid which cost three times more! Yet again, this excellent control of light leaks is more in keeping with a binocular in the £250-£400 range. Kudos to Barr & Stroud for their exceptional attention to detail in this regard. Examining a bright sodium street light showed no reflections or diffused light either, and the same was true when I turned the binocular on a bright waxing gibbous Moon in a freezing January sky. This binocular will provide lovely views of illuminated cityscapes, with no annoying reflections to contend with.
To remain objective, it pays to carry out all your tests with a high quality ‘control’ binocular…..ken.
After the appropriate adjusting of the right eye dioptre, I began my daylight tests of the Savannah 10 x 42, comparing it carefully to the images served up by my Leica Trinovid 8 x 32. The Barr & Stroud 10 x 42 offers up a very sharp and contrast-rich image across the vast majority of the field of view, with only a little distortion/softness at the edge of the field. Indeed, the field is noticeably better corrected in this binocular compared with other models I’ve tested in the £200-£250 price range. The distortion is more pronounced when panning the glass vertically than horizontally, however, just like all other roof prism binoculars I’ve used in the past. The Leica proved slightly sharper but the differences were subtle at best. The image in the 10 x 42 has a very slightly yellowed appearance in comparison to the Leica, as if a very mild photographic warm up filter had been placed in the optical train, which I did not personally find off-putting. Indeed, it helps accentuate browns and tan colours that little bit better, which imparts a nice aesthetic effect to my eyes.
Looking closely at the contoured bark on a tree trunk a few tens of yards away, I got the distinct impression that the 10 x 42 was delivering slightly more detail than the 8 x 32, a consequence of the higher magnification and larger aperture of its ocular lenses, though this was somewhat negated by virtue of the 10 x 42’s significantly greater weight, which makes keeping the instrument steady considerably more challenging than in the smaller and lower power Leica. Under a bright blue winter sky, I judged the image in the Leica to be slightly brighter than the 10 x 42, a fact that I explained away as being due to my eyes not being able to exploit the slightly larger exit pupil of the 10 x 42 glass under these conditions, as well as its lower efficiency of light transmission.
I observed no chromatic aberration in the centre of the field of the 10 x 42, but did begin to show some lateral colour as a high contrast target was moved off centre to the periphery of the field. The Leica also exhibited the same behaviour even though it does have extra low dispersion glass in one of its objective elements.
During prolonged field use, the position of the dioptre ring on the Savannah 10 x 42 had a tendency to get displaced ever so slightly, as it is all too easy to touch while moving the focus wheel, especially while wearing gloves. Having the dioptre adjustment under the right ocular lens is a better solution in this regard.
Focusing was easier and more responsive with the Leica glass, owing to its state-of-the art central focusing wheel, which is less stiff than the 10 x 42. I suspect though, that with more field use, the stiffness in the latter will subside and become more responsive. Close focus on the 10 x 42 is very impressive. Although the official stats claim 2 metres, I found I could focus down to about 1.75m – a very good result for a 10 x 42 by most anyone’s standards – but nowhere near as close as the Leica Trinovid, which can bring objects just under a metre into sharp focus, a result no other roof prism binocular on the market can achieve!
Depth of focus in the 10x 42 is very good, but not in the same league as the Leica 8 x 32, which was expected given the fact that lower power units tend to have greater focus depth in most real-world situations.
Examining some tree top branches against a bright sky, revealed that veiling glare was very well controlled in the Barr & Stroud 10 x 42 Savannah but maybe just falling a little short of the Leica Trinovid. This is an especially pleasing result in my opinion, as veiling glare can rather easily wash out an otherwise sharp and contrast-rich image. Indeed, the suppression of veiling glare in this economically priced binocular was far better than a few instruments I’ve tested that cost twice or three times more. For example, it is in a different league to that served up by my 10 x 25 Leica Trinovid, which tends to show rather a lot of this under certain viewing conditions.
Observing at dusk allowed me to test out the low light performance of both the Leica Trinovid 8 x 32 and the Barr & Stroud Savannah. This is where I saw the greatest weakness in the latter instrument. Though it did give a brighter image, I was amazed how well the Leica performed in comparison; to my average eyes at least, both instruments were delivering equally bright images well into twilight, with the 10 x 42 only pulling ahead in the last five minutes or so, as dusk transformed into true darkness. This result is attributed to the significantly greater efficiency of the Leica optical components, which transmits 90 per cent of all the light it collects to the eye.
However, under the cloak of darkness, the greater exit pupil and higher magnification of the 10 x 42, as well as its larger objective lenses, made it the easy winner observing a few of the showpieces of the winter sky. The Pleiades was more magnificent in the 10x 42, as was the Hyades, Double Cluster and Alpha Perseii Association. Stars remain sharp and tightly focused across most of the field, with only the extreme edges showing some visible distortion. In contrast to the Leica, the 10 x 42 had slightly more field curvature; something I had also noted during my daylight tests when examining a telephone pole and moving it to the edge of the field in both binoculars.
This is a great Moon gazing binocular too. Its lack of internal reflections and sharp optics deliver a very decent and clean image that will show many craters, mountains valleys and maria on the lunar surface. And don’t forget also, the Savannah can be mounted on a tripod or monopod for added stability, which enables you to see even more details!
Solid Accessories
Not only does one acquire a good binocular in the Barr & Stroud Savannah 10 x 42, but you also get above average quality accessories. The hard-covered clamshell case is a great way to store the instrument while not in use. The soft rubber ocular and objective covers are also a nice touch, as is the quality padded neck strap that comes as standard with the binocular. And if anything malfunctions, the parent company under which Barr & Stroud trades – Optical Vision Limited(OVL) – will repair or replace your binoculars if they fail during normal use. I have personally dealt with OVL in the past and they have always responded rapidly and effectively to any queries I had.
Concluding Thoughts
Reliable companion.
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 10 x 42 delivers very satisfying images that will impress the vast majority of users who look through it. It feels solid in the hands and has a Spartan, no-frills quality about it. For not much more than £100, the instrument delivers optics and ergonomics that punch well above what its modest price tag suggests, with a large sweet spot and good edge-of-field correction. Even the accessories are of very high quality, making this an especially sweet package for the budget conscious, or the frugal naturalist who doesn’t want to spend a small fortune on a state-of-the-art instrument. Finally, as a well-made achromatic binocular, it proves, once again, that good optics don’t need fancy low dispersion glass to deliver an engaging image.
All in all, this gets my highest recommendation as unbeatable value for money!
Thanks for reading!
Dr. Neil English has been using optical instruments for more than 40 years. He is the author of seven books including his magnum opus(650 + pages), Chronicling the Golden Age of Astronomy (2018), celebrating four centuries of visual astronomy, as well as the personalities who shaped the hobby and profession of astronomy as we know it today.
Title: The Story of the Cosmos, How the Heavens Declare the Glory of God
General Editors: Paul M. Gould & Daniel Ray
Publisher: Harvest House Publishers
ISBN: 978-0-7369-7736-4
Price: US $22.99
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Psalm 19:1
The night sky is the last great frontier. From a dark country site, away from the lights of towns and cities, the full grandeur of the starry heaven can be enjoyed. It melts even the hardest heart and fills us with awe as we contemplate its vast size, its teeming multitude of effulgent hosts and its great preternatural beauty. But for the Biblical King David, the night sky also presented powerful evidence that a Creator had fashioned it all. As an avid stargazer from my youth and a committed Christian, I have always regarded the majesty of the night sky as a grand expression of the created order.
That’s why my curiosity was piqued when I came across a new book, The Story of the Cosmos: How the Heavens Declare the Glory of God, edited by former schoolteacher and amateur astronomer, Daniel Ray, and philosopher/apologist, Paul M. Gould, who have assembled a stellar line of some of the finest Christian minds across a multitude of disciplines from the sciences, arts, philosophy and theology, united in their conviction that the Universe at large displays the unmistakable hallmarks of order, design and foresight from the microscopic realm of the sub-atomic to the macroscopic world of stars and galaxies; the handiwork of an all-powerful God; the God of the Bible.
The Story of the Cosmos comes at an especially exciting time when Darwinian ideology is being toppled by an avalanche of new science. The origin of life is as mysterious as ever; the more we probe its depths the more complex it becomes. So too is the nature of human consciousness. The book draws upon an exceptionally rich repository of intellectual thought from Aristotle, Plato and St. Augustine in the ancient world, to great Christian thinkers in the modern era including C. S Lewis, Alvin Plantinga, John Lennox and others who have all formulated the same answer to an age old question; why is the cosmos intelligible, rational and ordered? Their answer, arrived at using various philosophic approaches, is that the universe is the way it is because its Creator is also rational and human beings, made in the image of God, are capable, to some degree, of thinking God’s thoughts after Him.
Three chapters in Part I of the book, written by distinguished scientists, Guy Consolmagno, Guillermo Gonzalez and David Bradstreet, respectively, explore another, related question. What was God’s purpose in creating a cosmos that is intelligible to humankind? Their answer is that God has allowed us to be active participants in unravelling the mysteries of His creation and delights in humans figuring things out through the dual virtues of deep, logical thought and scientific experimentation. Our God has spilled his grace upon humankind in such a way that it encourages us to explore the riches of the Universe and to delight in learning something new. Planetary scientist, Dr. Guy Consolmagno, imagines himself studying the precious meteorites in lock step with his Creator, who he imagines is ‘sitting across from him’ in his laboratory, watching as he stumbles on some new insight. Astrobiologist, Dr. Guillermo Gonzales, describes the fascinating details of how our planet, far from being an ordinary world lost in the immensity of space, shows all the hallmarks of super-intelligent design for life in general, but human beings, in particular. He offers fascinating insights into things few people would never even consider. Why can we see the stars? Why is the Earth just right for launching probes into space? Why are we located on the outskirts of an enormous spiral galaxy, where the night sky is dark and transparent? The answer, as Gonzalez explains so eloquently, is that our Creator had it in mind all along to allow humans to come to some understanding of the great power, majesty and glory of His creation. In this sense, when we express awe for the beauty of the night sky, we are, in a certain sense, offering up a prayer to the Almighty. The same kind of enthusiasm is conveyed by stellar astronomer, Dr. David Bradfield, who describes how studying the complex light curves of variable stars is an exciting way to unravel the machinery of God’s creation.
It is not only through the media of science, philosophy and theology that humans have reacted to the created order. Artists too have also responded with their delicate brush strokes. In a wonderful essay by Terry Glaspey, we learn how the great out of doors and the beauty of the night sky inspired artists throughout history to see both the terrestrial and extra-terrestrial realms as a “grand cathedral” wherein the presence of God is palpable.
But all of this naturally raises other questions; what happens when scientists do not pursue the evidence wherever it leads? That’s a fascinating question that is answered by astrophysicist, Dr. Sarah Salviander, who describes in some considerable detail, the consequences of abandoning what I would call Judeo-Christian ways of thinking. Salviander showcases the disputes that arose between the astronomer, Sir Arthur Eddington, and his brilliant Indian graduate student, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (Chandra). Although Eddington admired Chandra’s theoretical achievements, he refused to accept where those conclusions concerning the fate of massive stars (neutron stars and black holes in particular) would lead him. Salviander writes:
The answer is that Eddington fell victim to some combination of the four primordial barriers to understanding that are constantly at work in the minds of every person; limited perspective, misleading emotions, intellectual inertia, and excessive pride……………..Longstanding and popular ideas are often difficult to overcome even when compelling evidence like Chandra’s is presented. And, sometimes people like Eddington experience a lapse in humility that causes them to use their authority to oppose an idea they just don’t like.
pp 94-95.
In similar fashion, the distinguished nuclear physicist, Robert J. Oppenheimer fell victim to the same kind of cognitive dissonance:
A close friend of Oppenheimer’s, the Nobel laureate physicist Isidor Isaac Rabi, believed that Oppenheimer’s abilities as a physicist suffered as a result of his turning away from the beliefs of the Old Testament in favour of the literature of Hindu mysticism. According to Rabi, Oppenheimer was scientifically blinded by an exaggerated sense of mystery and the boundary between the known and the unknown and became incapable of following the laws of physics to the very end. pp 95.
The same resistance to wholly rational and reasonable conclusions about the nature of reality is explored by Christian apologist, Dr. William Lane Craig, who explores the mindset of atheist cosmologists such as Lawrence Kraus, who expects his readers to believe that the Universe came into existence out of nothing, with no material cause or need for a Creator. In particular, he focuses on what Kraus attempts to pass as ‘nothing’ and convincingly concludes, citing sonorous rebuttals by his own scientific peers, that Kraus’ concept of nothing is in fact, a whole lot of ‘something.’
Physicists, Luke Barnes and Alan Hainline, who take a decidedly neutral stance on Christian theism in the book, similarly debunk ill-thought-through statements made by Darwin-thumping atheists such as Richard Dawkins, who famously declared that;
The Universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. DNA neither knows nor cares, DNA just is. And we dance to its music.
Unlike Dawkins, whose expertise is in zoology, Barnes and Hainline are actually qualified to comment on the notion of cosmic fine tuning, observing that, at every conceivable level, our Universe provides compelling evidence of being very special indeed. Why? Because if Dawkins’ statement were actually true, our Universe would simply not harbor life, especially conscious human life.
Given the overwhelming evidence for design and purpose in the Universe, how should the atheist or agnostic best respond to it? That question is explored in a thought-provoking essay by Paul M. Gould, who sets out a robust argument for theism based on the reasonable premise that naturalism cannot account for the flourishing of human life. Gould highlights the significant weaknesses of the so-called neo-Humean synthesis, which asserts that all of physical reality can be reduced to its micro-physical parts, in favor of what Gould calls the Aristotelian-Christian worldview, which much more robustly accounts for the properties of the Universe we humans observe in practice as image bearers of God’s character.
It was a great pleasure to read this beautifully composed work of Christian literature. It is timely, thoughtfully written and illustrated, reverent and inspiring, with great apologetic appeal. The Story of the Cosmos is a refreshing oasis for the human soul and deserves a special place in the library of all Christians, sky gazers and curious agnostics alike.
Dr. Neil English is the author of seven books in amateur and professional astronomy. His large historical work, Chronicling the Golden Age of Astronomy, explores the lives of astronomers and how their work often re-affirmed their strong Christian convictions.
The Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32; a marvellous companion for autumn exploration.
A work begun November 5 2020
The Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 has been my constant companion over the last few months, having gone on long days out, both at home, and on vacation to the Scottish borders. It has also been a marvellous instrument in my ongoing exploration of the binocular night sky. It’s one of those pieces of kit that keeps on delivering, time and time again, and while it is expensive as binoculars come, I think it was worth every penny, for reasons that I wish to elaborate on in this blog.
A Blaze of Autumn Glory
The vibrant colours of autumn are a visual gift from the Lord, a pick-me-up before the dull, cold days of winter. They’re meant to be enjoyed and there is no finer glass I’d rather use to explore them. Many Leica aficionados have described the extraordinary vibrancy of reds, oranges and greens they get from their binoculars. For a while, I dismissed that claim as subjective prattle, but having enjoyed the 8 x 32 Trinovid for several months now, I can more fully understand what they meant. And there may be some science to back that up. For example, the opticians at Leica can optimise the colour correction to peak in the green-red part of the visible spectrum, while leaving the blue end less corrected. I see evidence for this using the 8 x 32, since it does show some blue-violet fringing on highly contrasted targets. The fringing is only very slight mind you, and very lovely; in an innocent way; so I think it’s an acceptable compromise.
While the human world is increasingly dark, psychotic and distressing, I make a special effort to get outside and make the most of my free time, enjoying the wonders of creation. Unlike humans, mother nature still behaves as God intended it. The low autumn Sun creates extraordinary light shows, illumining the hills round my home. The contrast in this little Leica binocular really has to be seen to be believed. Its exceptional control of veiling glare produces images that are truly sumptuous to my average eyes. Details just pop. The intricate graining of tree trunks, the contours of exposed rock formations, the stark beauty of ruined farmhouses, castles and water mills – things and places hardly anyone notices have suddenly become worthwhile glassing targets, though I still get the odd funny look from passers by lol.
The exceptional close focus on the Leica Trinovid brings objects a smidgen less than 1 metre away into sharp focus. That’s unmatched by any binocular on the market, with the exception of the Pentax Papilio (with its 0.5m close focus). I have been able to get up-close and personal with rocks by the riverside and succulent autumn berries, and golden leaves glistening in weak sunshine after a shower of rain. The Scots are always moaning about the rain, but it is the key ingredient that creates and maintains the surreal beauty of the Scottish landscape. Long live the wet and the wild!
A Great Birding Binocular
Culcreuch Pond, looking east, with the Fintry Hills soaring in the background.
I’ve found the Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 to be the ideal birding binocular. With its 32mm objective lenses, it provides significantly brighter images than the best 25mm pocket glasses, particularly on dull, overcast conditions in the open air and in lower light conditions, such as under a forest canopy. And when the light is feeble, such as at dawn and dusk, the highly efficient light transmission(90 per cent) of the Leica glass really comes into its own, picking off details that elude lesser glasses. The silky smooth and fast central focusing wheel on the Trinovid is particularly well suited to birding, since it’s easy to adjust the focus as birds vary their distance from me. Added to this, is the instrument’s impressive depth of focus, allowing one’s subject to remain in sharp focus over a large range of middle-to-long distances.
My interest in birdwatching really took off during the cruel,in-human lockdowns starting in March earlier this year, and since then, I have continued to learn from books, as well as gaining some solid practical experience in the field. I have fitted new bird feeders in my garden and seed-laden fat balls that have served to lure many an avian species within striking distance. When I joined the RSPB, I was gifted a small bird box which our family has since erected about 2.5 metres above ground level on a conifer tree in the copse to the west of our large back garden. I have high hopes that it will become a cosy nesting place for some small bird come the spring.
The exceptional optical quality of the Leica has allowed me to observe all manner of bird; robins, finches, tits, wrens, tree-creepers, carrion crows, jackdaws, chaffinches, wood pigeons, collar doves and blackbirds, to name but a few, in glorious detail. I have also learned to recognise their distinctive voices, which helps me to pin down more elusive visitors that hide away in the bushes and hedgerows near my home. To date, my most thrilling sighting is a greater spotted woodpecker that keeps a keen eye on the fat ball feeder outside of my office. Having enjoyed all manner of small birds flitting to and fro for most of the time, I was overjoyed to observe one helping itself to a nutritious snack one afternoon in early October. Compared with all the other birds that usually come to visit, this handsome woodpecker, with its black and speckled white plumage and crimson red flank, seemed positively enormous in comparison. Indeed, I thought at one stage that it was going to tear down the fat ball feeder owing to its relatively large size, but all was well. In addition, my Leica was able to make out a small red nape on the bird which revealed to me its male sex. Isn’t that funny; unlike the fairer human sex, male birds are created to be more colourful in general than their female counterparts. Then again, I know some blokes who love nothing more than to dress up in garish, migraine-inducing colours, so maybe the distinction is not as well founded as I had thought lol.
Since then, I have identified another great spotted woodpecker in the large trees on Kippen Road, adjacent to the sports field in the village. They’re such timid creatures though, standing motionless for many minutes high in the canopy, and if it senses a threat, will quickly move to the opposite side of a tree trunk in order to hide. Beautiful birds!
Last year, I reported that a small squadron of magpies had taken up overnight residence in the rowan tree in my back garden. After a couple of months, they moved on., But this year, a couple of magpies have once again come to sleep in the same tree. Lots of folk have taken a disliking to these birds but I have found them to be charming and intelligent. Like Roman legionaries preparing for an overnight camp, I have observed them arriving at dusk, and carefully making their way to the centre of the tree, so protecting themselves from predators. And they’re up and away before dawn!
A pair of magpies resting overnight in the rowan tree.
Culcreuch Pond, about half a mile walk from my home, and featured in the image above, remains a favourite haunt of mine to observe ducks and mute swans that thrive in the small artificial waters immediately in front of the 12th century castle, that up to recently served as a popular hotel and retreat before it was shut down in January of this year, just before the China virus arrived. The beautiful, variegated hues of autumn trees flanking the shores of the pond makes for wonderful glassing opportunities and I’m always on the lookout for the odd grey heron hiding in the reedy shallows, and even a cormorant that took up residence there during the winter months of 2019. Hopefully, I will see one again this year, but so far with no luck.
On a recent October family vacation to a favourite farmhouse holiday cottage on the outskirts of Wigtown, on the Solway Firth, in Southwest Scotland, I was amazed to discover that the town had a little ‘harbour,’ which we had not visited before simply because we always took a different route down to the salt march. Though we’ve been no less than five times over the years, we had no idea that a tower hide had been constructed, dedicated to twitchers and other wildlife enthusiasts, which overlooks a pretty stretch of salt marsh, and which serves as a home to all manner of gull and wading bird. Alas, we only ‘discovered’ the hide on the final morning of our vacation. Thankfully, it was a bright and sunny spell and we were able to share some wonderful views of these creatures before making our way home. It’s amazing what lies right under your nose if you’re not looking for it! Needless to say, this will become a favourite spot for birdwatching on our next trip.
The view from the bird hide.
Extended Walks
At weekends and during our family vacations, I like to take off on longer 4-5 mile walks, exploring forests and hills. There are extensive forested regions near Newton Stewart, Wigtonshire, which provides great days out for families and groups of ramblers, with extensive forest trails to explore, either on foot or on mountain bikes. The feather weight of the Leica Trinovid 8 x 32 binocular allows me to carry it effortlessly through miles of difficult terrain. I am attracted to the riot of life that abide in forests. Fallen trees are a favourite glassing target in good light, where I can explore the vibrant colours of lichens, mosses and fungi that thrive on their rain-soaked surfaces. I have no compelling reason to glass in these places other than the aesthetic appeal of seeing the wondrous complexities of the creation, to activate the visual, auditory and olfactory senses as you wade through mud and decaying autumn leaves underfoot. The exceptionally robust build of the Trinovid lowers my anxiety levels, as I negotiate through bramble bushes and especially dense thickets of vegetation. This is an instrument that will easily negotiate knocks and bumps and still come up smelling of roses.
Interesting forest terrain near Newton Stewart, Wigtonshire.
On our journey home from Wigtown, we hooked up some old friends who live in a charming bungalow overlooking Tinto Hill near the village of Thankerton, Lanarkshire. Tinto soars just over 700m above the surrounding valley and makes for a good hill walk in the Spring and Summer months. But on this occasion, we decided to visit an old Roman fort dating to the Antonine Period in the mid-second century AD. Not much of the fort remains, save an old ditch that one can still walk around. There is also a bath house somewhere near the fort but we never got to see it that afternoon The fort overlooks the valley below, with Tinto imposingly rising to meet the sky on the far side.
Looking down on the valley from the Roman fort outside Thankerton, Lanarkshire, with Tinto Hill in the background.
A striking colonnade of trees leads the way up from the valley floor to the fort and is especially beautiful on a sunny afternoon, when the rich colours of autumn leaves dazzle the eye. One would be forgiven for thinking that the Romans created this too but such trees don’t live that long!
A visually striking colonnade of trees lead the way to the Roman fort.
The Romans had an active presence in Scotland during the High Empire but never attempted a full-scale invasion. The Scots love to pride themselves in claiming that the ancient Celts inhabiting these lands were too fearsome or intimidating for the Roman legions, but having studied Roman history at degree level, I understand that the likely truth is that they decided that it was just not economically viable to completely Romanise the northern part of Britannia. But try telling that to the Scots!
The ditch of the Roman Fort near Thankerton.
There is something really appealing about glassing a valley from a raised vantage. In my mind’s eye, I imagined the lonely vigils of a Roman auxiliary patrolling the turf ramparts of this ancient fort, looking down on the fields below and wondering if some raiding party would attack. What thoughts would have coursed through his mind?
Glassing in wide open terrain like this confers advantages to higher power binoculars. In this capacity, I hope to acquire another smaller Trinovid, the BCA 10 x 25, or a Zeiss Terra ED 10 x 25 in the near future, to enable me to explore this kind of terrain in greater detail.
Things Done Well
The 8 x 32 Trinovid was made for the great outdoors. I have used it in sub-zero temperatures, during the wee small hours of the morning observing the night sky. Even after an hour or so in such conditions, focusing remains silky smooth and precise, and the outer lenses remain fog free. When the instrument is taken in from the cold, some condensation does form on the ocular and objective lenses but disperses very quickly owing to the effective hydrophobic coatings applied to the exterior lens surfaces.
I have also tested the binocular in regard to its water proofing. Sound crazy? Perhaps! I filled a basin full of freshwater to a depth of about 8 inches and submerged the instrument in it, leaving it there for 15 minutes. I observed no air bubbles throughout the duration of that 15 minute episode, and after taking it out of the water and drying it at room temperature, I was delighted to see that it performed as good as it ever has. This little Trinovid is actually water proof to a depth of 4 metres, so my testing in this regard was rather modest. I suspect that many binoculars of lesser quality than this Trinovid are not really waterproof since they are not hermetically sealed. That’s just a hunch but I know of no one who is willing to sacrifice their binocular to the water gods, for fear that they might receive a nasty surprise!
The firmness of the eye cups on the Trinovid are marvellously engineered; certainly among the best in the industry. They offer several settings to accommodate virtually anyone’s taste, and once set in place, they remain firmly in place with absolutely no wiggle room. With lesser quality binoculars, you’re always wondering when and if the eyecups will fail, but with these, you can be 100 per cent confident that they will work flawlessly again and again and again.
Most economically priced binoculars possess eye cups that can’t be removed. In contrast, the Leica Trinovid eye cups can be pulled off to get at trapped grit, sand and other air-borne debris that accumulates under the cups with repeated use. This enables you to thoroughly clean both the ocular lenses and their supporting structures before popping the cups back on again. And when the day comes when the cups finally give up owing to wear and tear, I can call the folks at Leica who will send out replacement caps! Now that’s what I call service!
Unlike cheaper branded binoculars, the Leica Trinovid eye cups can be removed safely to clean the ocular lenses and their supporting structures.
Exploring the Heavens
The Leica Trinovid 8 x 32 has become my constant companion under the stars. In the last few months, I’ve greatly reduced my telescopic observations in favour of binocular surveys. Indeed, I have elected to learn the night sky completely anew using this binocular, choosing a patch of sky within a constellation, and carefully studying each binocular field that I chance upon. I have ‘discovered’ many new asterisms, star clusters and nebulae in this way using the 7.1 degree field of this binocular. The project will likely preoccupy me for years to come, but I derive great joy from it. After spending many decades peering through all manner of telescopes, it is so refreshing to re-learn the constellations using this fantastic binocular. Call it a new lease of life!
I’m very much looking forward to observing the great planetary conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, which reaches its climax just a few days before Christmas 2020. The Lord created the heavens to reveal His great power and glory. But He also gave us the starry heaven for signs & seasons. I understand this up-and-coming conjunction to be a possible sign that Yeshua foretold his disciples about the times concerning the closing of human history. Indeed, many of the other signs He prophesied have manifested before our very eyes; apostasy & the purging of the Church, a marked escalation in human wickedness which leads to lawlessness, false prophets, pestilences, wars and rumours of wars etc. What is more, the heavens similarly proclaimed the first coming of our Lord two thousand years ago with the Starof Bethlehem, that could well have been another planetary conjunction, a few of which occurred in the year spanning 2 to 3 BC. Like the fading of Betelgeuse last year, I believe the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction could well represent an unmistakable message from our Creator – that He will be returning soon for His Bride.
Even so, come Lord Yeshua!
Neil English is the author of seven books in amateur and professional astronomy, as well as several hundred magazine articles over the past 25 years. If you like his work, why not consider making a small personal donation, or purchasing one of his books. Thanks for reading!
As you may gather, I’ve taken a keen, active interest in testing out binoculars with an aim to providing my readers with good quality products that won’t break the bank. As part of that process, I needed a few entry-level models to compare and contrast them with other products purporting to provide better optical quality. In one transaction, I purchased an Eyeskey labelled 8 x 32 roof prism binocular on August 5 2019 from eBay. It was brand new and set me back £37.79, taking about two weeks to ship directly from China to my home in Scotland.
Here is a photo of what I received:
The Eyeskey Package.
Here is a close-up photo of the Eyeskey binocular; the reader will note the texturing of the armoring and distinctive tripod adaptor cover
The Eyeskey 8 x 32 roof prism binocular.
Here is what it looks like from the ocular end:
Note the plain 8 x 32 & Bak4 Prism labelling on the focus wheel.
And here is a photo of the tethered rubber objective lens covers as well as the thumb indentations on the underside of the binocular:
Note the tethered rubber objective covers and thumb indentations on the Eyeskey.
After inspecting the Eyeskey binocular and its accessories, I recalled another binocular, marketed by a company called Avalonoptics.co.uk, which I had come across in a previous internet search.
Here is Avalon’s 8 x 32 Mini HD binoculars( all images taken from their website):
Here is an image of the entire package:
Here is an image of the writing on the focusing wheel:
Note the thumb indentations on the under side of the barrels on the Avalon:
And here is an image of the tethered objective covers on the Avalon:
Next, I took a look at the specifications of both models.
Both claim to be fully multicoated, are nitogen filled and fog proof, but there is no mention of a phase coating on either model.
There is a few differences in the quoted specifications. The advertised field of view is 6.78 degrees for the Eyeskey and 6.9 degrees for the Avalon model; quite close. Eye relief is quoted as 18mm for the Eyeskey and 15mm for the Avalon, but these figures can often be incorrect or at least misleading(as I will explain in another up-and-coming binocular review). The Eyeskey has an advertised weight of 18.3 oz = 519 grams, whereas the Avalon has a quoted weight of 416 grams.
Weight can also be misleading though, as it can vary according to whether you include the lens covers and strap etc.
The boxes look pretty similar with just different logos on them, same goes for the neck strap and generic instruction sheet.
Now for the price comparison:
Eyeskey 8 x 32: £37.79
Avalon 8 x 32 Mini HD: £119(recently discounted 20% from £149)
Finally, have a look at this youtube presentation of the said Avalon Mini HD binocular here.
Is the Eyskey 8 x 32 model worth the £37.79?
I suppose for what you get it’s a bargain.
But what about the Avalon?
I’ll leave that up to you to decide!
Caveat Emptor!
Update: September 16 2020
I have been monitoring a website that sells Avalon binoculars and noted a number of irregularities that continue to concern me. If you click on this link, you’ll see a model called the Avalon Titan ED 10 x 42. If you scroll through the marketing blurb and the specifications of the binocular, its main feature is ED glass. But there is no mention of phase coatings, type of multi-coating, or dielectric coatings, the material out of which the chassis is constructed etc which I would expect given the very high price of the binocular; a whopping £1099 UK! You will also note that the packaging looks very similar to the Eyeskey model featured above, with a generic (one page) instruction sheet. To say the least, I would have expected far more technical information about such an expensive binocular, especially when it retails for more than top branded models from Zeiss and Leica, for example.
I dispatched an email to the said company a week ago, where I asked why the Titan model(weighing a whopping 1.3 kilos) was so much more expensive than their other models given the very sparse information provided on the website. I received no response. I sent another email to the company yesterday and it too has fallen on deaf ears!
The same website sells Zeiss Terra ED binoculars at greatly marked up prices. For example, the Terra ED pocket ( 8x 25) glass is on sale for £489 UK in comparison to nearly all other retailers( ~£250).
Needless to say I am deeply suspicious of this company and would continue to caution customers to tread carefully in order to avoid disappointment.
Neil English debunks many telescopic myths in his new historical work, Chronicling the Golden Age of Astronomy.
The Christian influence on Western Civilisation will never be erased.
Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World by Tom Holland
Little Brown 2019
(594 pages, Hardcover $20.79)
As I sat down to collect my thoughts for the review of the distinguished British historian and author, Tom Holland’s latest book, Dominion- How the Christian Revolution remade the World, we are in lockdown, owing to the COVID-19 pandemic that has swept the planet. Deprived of our usual liberties to roam where we will, humanity had risen above the drudgery of government imposed captivity, and shown its better side – if only for a while – helping those who are vulnerable, the sick and the elderly, the poor and the destitute, supporting our health care workers on the front line, raising countless millions of dollars for struggling charities, as well as lifting the spirits of families around the world with songs, stories, games and jests.
The irony of this predicament was not lost on me as I finished the final chapters of Holland’s latest tour de force. The thesis of Dominion is that, despite the west’s departure from Judeo-Christian values upheld for centuries and millennia, and though we largely live in a post-truth society more concerned with feelings than facts, the Christian message still casts a long shadow over the shared values of our contemporary, secular, civilisation. Acts of charity, selflessness, compassion and sacrifice – all of which are deeply anchored in the gospels of the New Testament- were abundantly on display in our societies during this time of crisis.
Drawing on 25 centuries of human civilisation, Holland calls upon a rich depository of ancient, medieval and modern history to drive his point home. Beginning with the Jews, who were the first people to receive instruction from the Creator God of the Bible, Holland contrasts the strict monotheism of Judaism to the polytheism of the surrounding nations. In addition, unlike the idols of silver, gold and fine polished stone used to characterise the gods of other nations, the Biblical God first revealed to the patriarchs was not to be worshipped in like manner. Drawing on the moral laws preserved in the Torah, Holland explores the implications of the Ten Commandments, the sabbath and laws establishing proper sexual relations in this ancient people. These laws and precepts, Holland convincingly argues, though resisted by the Persians, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans, gradually became written on the hearts of what we might call western civilisation in the aftermath of the fall of the Roman world.
The singular life of Christ – an itinerant preacher and healer born and raised in the Roman-occupied territories of Palestine, and subjected to a horrific execution on a Roman Cross – Holland argues, set in motion the greatest revolution in human cultural history the world has ever seen. Indeed, Holland goes so far as to suggest that the ideas conveyed in the New Testament effectively detonated the cumulative wisdom of the ancient world. We are not the benefactors of Greek and Roman civilisation, as many historians have asserted, but of Christendom.
Accordingly, Holland lays out the evidence for this startling conclusion, exploring how the early Christians followed the example of their Lord and Savior through great acts of charity, caring for the sick, the orphaned, the poor and the weak, not to mention heroic acts of martyrdom that shocked and horrified the pagans who lived alongside them. Surviving waves of persecution under tyrannical Roman Emperors, the blood of its martyrs sowed the seed of evangelism in the hearts and minds of both slave and free for the cause of Christ. And instead of stamping the new religion out, such heroism only served to swell its ranks across all tiers of society, from the mega-rich to the abject poor.
After Constantine the Great granted his imprimatur to the Christian religion in the 4th century AD, a golden age of Christian literature blossomed in its wake, including many of the writings of the early Church Fathers – Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine of Hippo, in the western tradition, and Basil of Caesarea, Athanasius of Alexandria and John Chrysostom in the eastern tradition. And after the collapse of the Roman Empire in the west in the late 5th century AD, Christian ecclesia become synonymous with centres of learning. On the precipice of the known world, Christian monasteries preserved the knowledge passed down from classical antiquity and would eventually become the seedbeds for the establishment of the first university towns such as Padua, Bologna, Oxford, Cambridge and Madrid, to name but a few.
Holland explores the long ascent of what would emerge to be the powerful Roman Catholic Church, which came nearest to making the Christian religion truly catholic, or universal, but does not shy away from the problems within the Roman See which eventually led to its greatest schism; the Reformation and Protestantism. Holland displays a nuanced understanding of how key individuals of the Reformation such as Martin Luther, fanned the flames of antisemitism by equating Jews with vermin and calling for their extirpation for the rejection and murder of the true Messiah. How could Luther, who was in lockstep with the beating heart of so many ordinary people, turn out to be a hater of the original People of the Book? Are not all human beings made in the image of God? Whatever the reasons, antisemitism remained alive and well in the centuries that followed, as Holland explores in discussing the persecution of Jews by the Spanish Church throughout the 14th and 15th centuries, and culminating with the Nazi regime which ordered the extirpation of millions of Jews in the years leading up to and throughout World War II.
But antisemitism was just one aberration that emerged from what Holland couches more generally as muddled theology. The same could be said to have occurred with the problem of slavery and racism in general. Holland recounts stories about folk who could look you straight in the eye and tell you that their Bible – in both the Old and New Testaments – condoned slavery in its various forms. And yet, while it’s easy to take a few Biblical verses out of context to justify almost anything, most references to bondservants in the Old Testament do not have the same meanings we ascribe to slavery in our own society. Evidence of this is clear enough in Exodus 23:9 when the Lord warns the people of Israel not to oppress the ‘alien’ and the ‘foreigner’ in the land, and that to remember that they too were once under bondage. Furthermore, St. Paul boldly proclaimed that there is neither slave nor free, neither Jew nor Greek – all are one in Christ Jesus. It was with such convictions that prominent Christians such as William Wilberforce and others -curiously not mentioned by Holland – who provided the abolitionists with the political power to end slavery, first across the British Empire, and later in the New World, especially through the monumental efforts of Abraham Lincoln in the aftermath of the American Civil War. The author revisits racism later in the book in his discussion of the late Nelson Mandela and the thorny issue of apartheid in the Republic of South Africa.
Holland also explores the radical effects of science on the Christian faith, particularly the works of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution by natural selection. Darwin’s dangerous ideas gave intellectuals who either hated or held the Christian worldview in contempt – Aldous Huxley, Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Andrew Carnegie and Adolf Hitler – plenty of ammunition to show that blind, impersonal and implacable forces shaped the origin and development of all life on earth. And man, long held to be a special creation by God – was merely just another evolved animal. One idea united all these men; if nature was red in tooth and claw, where the fittest only survived, surely human societies had a duty to follow suit. Suddenly the centuries old Christian ideals of compassion, sympathy and charity, respecting all individuals as unique creations of the Godhead, were now being portrayed as vice – deluded and ‘pusillanimous’ – and certainly not how an enlightened mankind ought to behave. And yet, all the while, there were (and still are) Christians who came to accept evolution, they do so ignorantly, since the latest scientific advances, which sadly, are not investigated by Holland in this treatise, are now rapidly and firmly demolishing those claims.
The God of the Bible is the God of love. Shouldn’t love always win? Holland looks at some controversial manifestations of ‘love wins,’ including the rise of homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle in the modern world and the ordination of women clergy. If life-long monogamous relationships are the Christian ideal, Holland asks, what is so immoral about gay marriage? And if the Bible teaches that men and women are equal but different in the eyes of God, who shows no impartiality, why can’t women deliver sermons from the pulpit? Holland shies away from offering his own opinion on these questions but suffice it to say that a close reading of the Bible condemns all homosexual acts as gross violations of God’s plan for human beings. What’s more, such deviant behaviour has a strong destabilising influence on the nuclear family. And, as to the question of women clergy, St. Paul only offers his opinion (in the negative) rather than stating that it is a decree from Sovereign Lord, and thus is open to fresh debate.
Dominion is a book that deserves to be read by a broad cross-section of society, by people of faith and those of none. And while Holland maintains a decidedly agnostic tone throughout, he is certainly sympathetic to and, I suspect, somewhat in awe of the long shadow the Christian worldview has cast over human civilisation; a shadow that shows little sign of abating in the 21st century.
Dr. Neil English is the author of seven books in amateur and professional astronomy. He also earned a Diploma in Classical Studies from the Open University. His latest historical work, Chronicling the Golden Age of Astronomy, demonstrates how the science of astronomy was profoundly influenced by observers fully committed to the Christian faith.
“Life should not exist. This much we know from chemistry. In contrast to the ubiquity of life on Earth, the lifelessness of other planets makes far better chemical sense.” So writes Professor James Tour, one of the world’s foremost synthetic organic chemists, based at Rice University in Texas. Intimately acquainted with the latest research in prebiotic chemistry, Tour has expressed severe skepticism that a plausible naturalistic mechanism for the origin of life will be found any time soon. But he goes even further:
“We synthetic chemists should state the obvious. The appearance of life on Earth is a mystery. We are nowhere near solving this problem. The proposals offered thus far to explain life’s origin make no scientific sense. Beyond our planet, all the others that have been probed are lifeless, a result in accord with our chemical expectations. The laws of physics and chemistry’s Periodic Table are universal, suggesting that life based upon amino acids, nucleotides, saccharides and lipids is an anomaly. Life should not exist anywhere in our Universe. Life should not even exist on the surface of the Earth.”1
Dr. Tour’s views have surfaced at a time when astronomers have been peering into the depths of space, searching for intelligent signals from hypothetical alien civilizations. Yet although they have been listening for more than half a century, ET has not chimed in. The quest to detect life beyond the Earth is admittedly in its infancy, but the negative results thus far produced have caused more than a few scientists to question the underlying assumptions made by the early pioneers in the quest to find extra-terrestrial life: Frank Drake and Carl Sagan.
Despite what the general media report, there are a number of serious problems with the standard origin-of-life models, for which their proponents have failed to provide good answers. For example, life on Earth requires a source of homochiral molecules, that is, molecules that are capable of rotating the plane of polarized light either to the left (L) or to the right (D). Specifically, life invariably requires L amino acids and D sugars. But so far, chemists have been unable to identify a plausible natural mechanism by which these left- and right-handed biomolecules can be generated at the high level of purity necessary for the first cells to form. Indeed, such molecules can only be synthesised under highly constrained laboratory conditions, using purified (read bought in) reagents, which have little or no relevance to the environment of the early Earth. And while meteorites have been found that contain small amounts of amino acids, they invariably are shown to contain equal amounts of L and D isomers (technically known as a racemic mixture).
In short, no conceivable naturalistic scenario could result in the generation of the large, stable ensembles of homochiral ribose and homochiral amino acids that all naturalistic origin-of-life models require, affirming why no such natural sources have ever been found.2 I recently asked Dr. Tour directly if the problem of homochirality had been solved, and he firmly responded, “No; it is far from solved.”
The Phosphorus Conundrum
The element phosphorus is vital for the proper functioning of living cells, being a constituent of both RNA and DNA, as well as of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the universal energy currency of all known life forms. But recent work conducted by Cardiff University astronomers suggests that phosphorus could be scarce in many parts of the universe. “Phosphorus is one of just six major chemical elements on which Earth organisms depend,” says Dr. Jane Greaves, and it is crucial to the compound ATP, which cells use to store and transfer energy. Astronomers have just started to pay attention to the cosmic origins of phosphorus and found quite a few surprises. In particular, phosphorus is created in supernovae—the explosions of massive stars—but the amounts seen so far don’t match our computer models. I wondered what the implications were for life on other planets if unpredictable amounts of phosphorus are spat out into space and later used in the construction of new planets.3
The Cardiff team used the UK’s William Herschel telescope, situated on La Palma in the Canary Islands, to measure the levels of phosphorus and iron in the Crab Nebula, a well-known supernova remnant. They compared those figures to measurements taken earlier from another supernova remnant known as Cassiopeia A (Cas A). Their preliminary results proved very surprising. While the measurements of Cas A showed relatively high levels of phosphorus, those from the Crab Nebula showed far lower levels. “The two explosions seem to differ from each other, perhaps because Cas A results from the explosion of a rare type of super-massive star,” said Dr. Phil Cigan, another member of the Cardiff team. “If phosphorus is sourced from supernovae,” added Greaves, and then travels across space in meteoritic rocks, I’m wondering if a young planet could find itself lacking in reactive phosphorus because of where it was born? That is, it started off near the wrong kind of supernova? In that case, life might really struggle to get started out of phosphorus-poor chemistry on another world otherwise similar to our own.4
Re-evaluating the Drake Equation
Ever since the American astronomer Frank Drake introduced his famous eponymous equation in the early 1960s, astronomers have produced widely varying estimates of the number of extant extra-terrestrial civilizations present in the Milky Way Galaxy. Until fairly recently, the estimates varied from 10,000 to a few million. Countering these estimates, some scientists have re-examined the so-called Fermi Paradox, posed by the distinguished Italian physicist Enrico Fermi in the form of a question: If the universe is so large, with innumerable habitable planets, then why have we not detected any sign of ET?
A team of scientists and philosophers based at the Institute of Humanity in Oxford University has taken a new look at the reasoning behind the Drake equation, and found that its optimistic expectations are linked to models like the Drake equation itself. The problem, as these researchers point out, is that all such models “implicitly assume certainty regarding highly uncertain parameters.” Indeed, following an analysis, they concluded that “extant scientific knowledge corresponds to uncertainties that span multiple orders of magnitude.” When these uncertainties are introduced, the outcome is strikingly different: “When the models are re-cast to represent realistic distributions of uncertainty, we find a substantial ex ante probability of there being no other intelligent life in our observable universe, and thus that there should be little surprise when we fail to detect any signs of it.” This result, they assert, “dissolves the Fermi paradox, and in doing so removes any need to invoke speculative mechanisms by which civilizations would inevitably fail to have observable effects upon the universe.”5
Questioning the Mediocrity Principle
Over the past few decades, astronomers have discovered thousands of exo-planets orbiting nearby stars, so that now there is little doubt that the number of planets in the observable universe likely exceeds the number of stars. Exo-planet hunters have discovered that many of these planets orbit their stars within the so-called habitable zone—that narrow annulus around a star that allows for the stable existence of water on a planet’s surface. Nevertheless, as geologist Peter Ward and astronomer Donald Brownlee argued in their highly influential book, Rare Earth; Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe,6 many of the features of planet Earth that have made it suitably equipped to allow both microbial and complex life to flourish on it over billions of years are likely very rare in the rest of the Universe.
For instance, the vast majority of potentially habitable exo-planets orbit low-mass red dwarf stars, which make up 75 percent of all the stars in the galaxy.7 These stars are much more active than sun-like stars, thus exhibiting higher rates of flaring than does the Sun. Many such stars also generate strong stellar winds that could strip away the atmospheres of their planets.8 And many planets are located so close to their parent stars that they have become tidally locked, meaning that they do not rotate on an axis but constantly present the same face to their stars as they move in their orbits. Yet another issue pertains to the potential of gravitational perturbations of a habitable planet by its neighbouring planets. Even small changes to the orbital characteristics of a planet could extirpate any developing life that might exist upon it. All these conditions raise many problems for the development of any hypothetical life forms on the surface of these planets over long periods of time.
NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope is currently being utilized in a special program called HAZMAT—Habitable Zones and M Dwarf Activity Across Time. And the early results from the program do not look encouraging. Preliminary data on just a dozen young red dwarf stars show that the frequency of flaring is much higher in them than in stars like the Sun; they typically emit flares with energies that are between 100 and 1,000 times higher than those of their elder counterparts. The most energetic red dwarf flares, dubbed Hazflares, are far more energetic than the most energetic flares ever to come from the Sun. “With the Sun, we have a hundred years of good observations,” says Parke Loyd, a member of the scientific team involved in the project.
And in that time, we’ve seen one, maybe two, flares that have an energy approaching that of the Hazflare. In a little less than a day’s worth of Hubble observations of these young stars, we caught the Hazflare, which means that we’re looking at superflares happening every day or even a few times a day.9
So-called super-earths—worlds larger than the Earth but smaller than Neptune—have recently been identified as possible candidate worlds for the development of life, but there is as yet no scientific consensus on whether they can maintain or even allow plate tectonic activity to occur in their crusts. Without plate tectonics, there will be far less efficient nutrient re-cycling, which would greatly hinder the flourishing of hypothetical life forms.
In March 2019, a team of astronomers based at the Australian National University dealt yet another blow to the prospects of finding viable exo-planetary biosystems. Modelling the magnetic fields of a large number of exo-planets, the astronomers concluded that planets with a strong magnetic field, like Earth, are likely to be very rare. “Magnetic fields appear to play an essential role in making planets habitable, so I wanted to find out how Earth’s magnetic field compared to those of other potentially habitable planets,” says Sarah Macintyre, the lead author of the paper.10 “We find most detected exo-planets have very weak magnetic fields, so this is an important factor when searching for potentially habitable planets,” she added.
Life on Mars or Venus?
Scarcely a year goes by without the question arising of whether or not Mars has microbial life. This issue was brought into sharp focus in June 2018, when NASA scientists announced the discovery by the rover Curiosity of organic matter in the soil of an ancient lakebed.11 But “organic matter” means different things to different people. Simply put, matter that is carbon-rich is not necessarily derived from biogenic sources.
More broadly though, if evidence of either extant or past life on Mars is uncovered, it might well also be discovered that such life originated on Earth. Indeed, it is estimated that over the 4-billion-year history of life on Earth, so much terrestrial soil has found its way to Mars that the Red Planet can boast an average of 2 kilograms of terrestrial soil per square kilometre of its surface (or about 11.3 pounds per square mile).12 It is certainly possible that some microbial life was delivered there along with the soil—in fact, the discovery of either extant microbial life or microfossils on Mars or the recent claim of life in the clouds of Venus might well be anticipated. If that happens, astrobiologists will need to consider the possibility that it came from Earth before claiming that any such life originated on these worlds. The popular media, pushing sensationalism, would never be so cautious.
Questioning Biosignatures on Exo-planets
Oxygenic photosynthesis by plants is the mechanism that produces the vast majority of the molecular oxygen in the terrestrial atmosphere. So for several decades, astrobiologists have speculated that the detection of oxygen in the atmosphere of an exo-planet would provide good evidence that life must exist there.13 While the detection of substantial levels of this gas would certainly be suggestive of the presence of plant life as we know it, it pays to remember that there are established abiotic mechanisms (mechanisms derived from non-living sources) that also can generate substantial molecular oxygen.
A group headed by Chinese astronomer Feng Tian of Tsinghua University published two interesting papers in 2009 that show that stars having less than 50 percent of the mass of the Sun (i.e., the majority of stars) emit copious quantities of hard UV rays and soft X rays throughout their long nuclear burning phases of up to 10 billion years.14 They also showed that when a lifeless exo-planet possessing carbon dioxide in its atmosphere is irradiated, the rays can break down the CO2 into carbon atoms and molecular oxygen. Over time, the carbon atoms, being less massive, escape into space, leaving the molecular oxygen behind. Tian’s calculations show that this molecular oxygen can reach concentrations of a few percent and so might be confused with a genuine biosignature.
When a team of chemists from Johns Hopkins University simulated the atmospheres of exo-planets beyond the solar system, they found that they could create simple organic molecules and oxygen under various scenarios without the mediation of life.15 “Our experiments produced oxygen and organic molecules that could serve as the building blocks of life in the lab, proving that the presence of both doesn’t definitively indicate life,” says Chao He, assistant research scientist in the Johns Hopkins Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences. “Researchers need to more carefully consider how these molecules are produced.” Up-and-coming missions, such as the highly anticipated ones utilizing the James Webb Space Telescope, would need to take results like these into account before jumping to any firm conclusions about the habitability of a candidate planet. As a case in point, the recent flap in the media about the detection of phosphine on Venus, upon further analysis, showed that the biomarker in question was not, in fact, present in statistically significant levels.
In a recent development, a team of planetary scientists led by Li Zeng at Harvard University estimated that as many as 35 percent of exo-planets may have impenetrable water oceans hundreds of kilometres deep.16 But while NASA has long adopted the mantra, “follow the water,” the same scientists caution that these planets are very unlikely to be habitable. Their fathomless ocean worlds would generate pressures millions of times greater than those found on Earth, resulting in exotic, rock-like ice formations many kilometres deep (such as ice VII) covering their floors. Such conditions would prevent any nutrient recycling from occurring, thus rendering these planets sterile.
Call for Caution
Investigating whether extra-terrestrial life exists or not is a profoundly important and interesting scientific endeavor, but at this point, there are good grounds for remaining skeptical about whether it actually exists. Given the arguments raised in this article, it is entirely reasonable to think that life might be extraordinarily rare in the universe, perhaps even unique to Earth. Only time will tell.
Notes
James Tour, An Open Letter to My Colleagues (August 2017): http://inference-review.com/article/an-open-letter-to-my-colleagues.
Hugh Ross and Fazale Rana, Origins of Life (RTB Press, 2014).
“Paucity of phosphorus hints at precarious path for extraterrestrial life” (Apr. 4, 2018): eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-04/ras-pop040318.php.
Ibid.
Anders Sandberg et al., “Dissolving the Fermi Paradox” (June 8, 2018):
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.02404.pdf.
Peter D. Ward and Donald Brownlee, Rare Earth; Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe (Copernicus Books, 2000).
“Superflares from young red dwarf stars imperil planets,” NASA News (Oct. 22, 2018):
O. Cohen et al., “Magnetospheric Structure and Atmospheric Joule Heating of Habitable Planets Orbiting M-Dwarf Stars,” Astrophysical Journal 790 (July 2014): doi:10.1088/0004-637X/790/1/57.
Ibid., note 7.
“Strong planetary magnetic fields like Earth’s may protect oceans from stellar storms,” Royal Astronomical Society (Mar. 14, 2019): https://m.phys.org/news/2019-03-strong-planetary-magnetic-fields-earth.html.
Jennifer L. Eigenbrode et al., “Organic Matter Preserved in 3-Billion-Year-Old Mudstones at Gale Crater, Mars,” Science 360 (June 8, 2018): https://doi:10.1126/science.aas9185.
Ibid., note 2.
Carl Sagan et al., “A Search for Life on Earth from the Galileo Spacecraft,” Nature 365 (Oct. 21, 1993): nature.com/articles/365715a0.
Feng Tian, “Thermal Escape from Super Earth Atmospheres in the Habitable Zones of M Stars,” Astrophysical Journal 703 (Sept. 2, 2009): https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/96200/Tian-2009-THERMAL%20ESCAPE%20FROM.pdf;sequence=1; Feng Tian et al., “Thermal Escape of Carbon from the Early Martian Atmosphere,” Geophysical Research Letters 26 (Jan. 31, 2009): https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2008GL036513.
Chao He et al., “Gas Phase Chemistry of Cool Exoplanet Atmospheres: Insight from Laboratory Simulations,” ACS Earth Space Chemistry (Nov. 26, 2018): https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.8b00133.
Li Zeng et al., “Growth model interpretation of planet size distribution,” PNAS (Apr. 29, 12019): pnas.org/content/early/2019/04/23/1812905116.
Neil English has been following developments in pre-biotic chemistry and astrobiology for the last 25 years. He holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry and a BSc(Hons) in physics & astronomy. His latest book, Chronicling the Golden Age of Astronomy (Springer, 2018), explores four centuries of visual astronomy. The article first appeared in Salvo Magazine Summer 2019. You can support his ongoing work by making a small donation to his website. Thanks for reading!
Three binoculars offering very good performance for a modest price.
April 14 2020
As my regular readers will know, I’ve spent quite a lot of time in recent years seeing what’s what in the binocular market. But just like the telescope market, all is not what it seems. You don’t always get what you pay for and you can find genuine bargains that offer much better bang for buck than those usually presented on internet forums frequented by amateur astronomers, birders and the like. The trouble with these forums is that they usually become hijacked by folk who insist on using and promoting premium products that are usually way beyond the price range of most enthusiasts and many good products simply fall below the radar and so never see the light of day. In this blog, I’ll be presenting three binoculars from the pocket, compact and mid-size aperture range that offer exceptional value for money, having been thoroughly tested(not the usual ‘mickey mouse testing’ seen on the internet) by yours truly in a variety of field conditions.
I’m writing this fully in the knowledge that a lot of folk are hurting financially at the moment, owing to the international crisis precipitated by the corona virus. Millions of people’s mobility has been severely restricted and so there may be quite a few individuals out there who may be looking for cost-effective products that will make life in lock-down that little bit more palatable. What better way than a good binocular to bring the world closer and to examine the beauty of the creation from the vantage of a garden, rooftop or balcony?
All of the binoculars featured in this blog are well made, coupling very good mechanics with excellent optics, all have price tags under £150(UK) and all come with a ten-year guarantee so that if you’re not fully satisfied with the product you can always return it in due course. These instruments include:
The Opticron Aspheric LE 8 x 25 pocket binocular
The Nikon Prostaff 7S 8 x 30
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42
The Opticron Aspheric LE 8 x 25:
The Opticron Aspheric LE 8 x 25 has an rugged aluminium body with dual hinge design that allows it to be folded up into a very small size so that it fits inside a pocket.
Are you looking for a well-made pocket glass that you can take anywhere to deliver very sharp, high-contrast images of your environment? The Opticron Aspheric LE 8 x 25may be all the binocular you might need. Opticron is a well established British firm with a long history of delivering high quality optical products to their customers. The unit has fully multi-coated optics, high-reflectivity silver coated, phase corrected BAK-4 prisms to maximise light transmission. My glare tests using a very intense artificial light source shows to show up internal reflections and unwanted glare revealed that not one, but two of these instruments produced very satisfactory suppression of stray light. This is a good indicator of high contrast optics even in difficult lighting situations, such as glassing artificial light sources at night and observing heavily back-lit daylight scenes. The unit shown above was purchased for my wife and was acquired before the newer model was brought to market. The only difference between the newer and older models is that the former are fully water- and fog-proof, purged internally with inert, dry nitrogen gas.
The Opticron Aspheric LE folds out to suit most anyone’s inter-pupillary distance( IPD) and has well made twist up eye cups.
Tipping the scales at about 290g, the little Opticron pocket glass has good quality, twist-up eye cups that hold their position well and possess generous, 16mm eye relief, making them well suited both for eye-glass wearers and non-eye glass users alike. The Opticron also features a built-in lanyard for easy transport in the field so there’s no need to fit a strap. Focusing is smooth and precise, and the newer unit has slightly better rubber armouring for comfortable handling in the field. Close focus is also exceptional on these units. I measured one at 1.4 metres!
The Opticron Aspheric LE 8 x 25 allows you to get to work or play quickly.
Optically, these little Opticrons serve up very sharp, high contrast images and their aspherical ocular lenses ensure that the image does not degrade appreciably even when subject is imaged at the edge of the field. The only slight downside with these units is their relatively small field of view; just 92 metres at 1000m(~5.2 angular degrees), but the fine optics more than makes up for this small field!
The newer model comes with a beautiful neoprene carry case that perfectly fits the binoculars.
The well-made logoed carry case fits the pocket binocular exceptionally well for easy transport and storage.
Retailing for £129(UK), these pocket glasses will provide years of hassle-free entertainment that is sure to delight anyone who uses them! I’ve often employed them for limited astronomical applications too, where they have proven their worth in delivering razor sharp and glare free images of the Moon, bright planets, and with an almost flat extended field, are well suited for glassing larger star fields and bright deep sky objects.
An elegant, ultra-portable pocket binocular.
The Nikon Prostaff 7S 8 x 30:
The Nikon Prostaff 7S 8 x 30 compact binocular.
The next binocular featured in this blog was a very pleasant surprise! I took a punt on the Nikon Prostaff 7s 8 x 30 out of sheer curiosity, since the vast majority of comments made by their owners were very positive indeed. And I can now say they weren’t wrong!
Weighing in at 415g, the Prostaff 7s 8 x 30 is very light weight for a binocular with these specifications. The optics are fully broadband multi-coated and the prisms are phase (and silver) coated for bright and sharp images. Being significantly larger than a pocket glass, they are easier to hold and easier to engage with owing to their larger exit pupil( 3.75mm). I was very surprised to learn that the Prostaff 7s has a higher light transmission than Nikon’s more expensive offering, the Monarch 8 x 30, as revealed in my more in-depth reviewI conducted on this binocular earlier this year. With a length of only 12cm, it is only one centimetre longer than the Opticron pocket glass keeping it very small and tidy!
The Nikon Prostaff 7s 8 x 30 has good quality twist -up and down eye cups that hold their position very well.
Despite being very light weight, it’s very easy to hold steady in my hands owing to its shorter bridge which exposes a larger area to wrap your hands around the barrels. The big focus wheel is buttery smooth and moves effortlessly with zero backlash or slack from close focus (just over 2 metres) to infinity in less than one revolution. The Prostaff 7S has well-made, twist-up eye cups that offers generous (15.4mm) eye relief to suit both eye glass wearers and those that don’t. The poly-carbonate body is overlaid by a thick rubber-like armour with exceptional grip. In addition, the instrument is fully water proof (1m depth for 10 minutes according to the user manual) and being filled with dry nitrogen gas, is also fog proof.
My tests show that the little 8 x 30 was superior to the Opticron in suppressing glare and internal reflections, which came as yet another pleasant surprise to me. Optically, this compact-sized binocular packs a powerful optical wallop. Having a true field of 114m @ 1000m (6.5 angular degrees), the image is very sharp and contrasty, and retains its sharpness almost to the very edge of the field. In addition, there is very little attenuation of light as one moves from the centre to the field stop, unlike many other models I have tested(sometimes costing many times more). This level of optical excellence is achieved by keeping the field of view on the small side compared with many other 8 x 30/32 units you are likely to encounter. I found this a very acceptable compromise though, as 6.5 degrees is still plenty good enough for most applications.
Although the Prostaff 7S units don’t employ ED glass, the chromatic aberration is, to all intents and purposes, non-existent, and delivers no appreciable reduction in performance over an equivalent unit employing ED glass. Like I said before, don’t fall for marketing hype. Most users won’t be able to tell the difference between a unit with ED glass elements and one without, provided that quality optical components are properly assembled in house.
The Prostaff 7s 8 x 30 compact binocular has an exceptionally smooth focus wheel for precision focusing in the field.
Having both larger objective lenses and exit pupils, the Nikon Prostaff 7s is noticeably superior to any pocket glass in low light conditions, where it serves up brighter images at dawn or dusk or on dull winter days. But its biggest performance difference over pocket glasses comes into play when turned on the night sky, where its greater light grasp pulls in significantly fainter stars, making deep sky observing more rewarding.
A fantastic performer for a great price: the Nikon Prostaff 7S 8 x 30.
Together with a good rain guard and high quality padded neck strap featuring the Nikon logo, this 8 x 30 unit is likely to please the vast majority of users and will deliver flawless performance for many years. All in all, the Nikon Prostaff 7s 8 x 30 offers exceptional value for money in today’s market, combining great ergonomics with remarkable optical performance for its modest price tag (~£140 UK).
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42:
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42 super-wide angle.
Now for a very special binocular. When I started out looking at the modern binocular market, I took the advice of a number of more experienced glassers who recommended I try a Barr & Stroud roof prism binocular. Now, several years on, I’m very glad I did. Every model I have tried for their range has been impressive. But one model in particular stood out from the crowd; the Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42. Having owned and tested two samples of this product, I can say, hand on heart, that it’s got to be one of the best bargains your money can buy.
Built like a proverbial tank, it sports a whopping 143m@1000m true field; one of the widest on the market for a binocular with these specifications. But unlike a string of other models in this modest price class, you get an extraordinarily well corrected field with an enormous sweet spot that keeps the object well focused even near the edge of the field. With a larger exit pupil of 5.4mm, the 8 x 42 is supremely comfortable to use, even by complete novices, since it is very easy to get good eye placement. The body is covered with a thick rubberised armouring, which provides excellent grip even in tricky conditions. Unlike most other roof binos in this price class, the Savannah has its dioptre ring located just ahead of the focus wheel, making it very easy to access should you wish to tweak the optics in the right barrel. On the downside, its location makes it that little bit easier to knock out of place while glassing in the field and so a little bit more care should be afforded to it when removing the instrument from its hard, clam shell case.
Everything about the Barr & Stroud exudes quality. The focuser is a joy to use and one of the best I have experienced in an 8 x 42. It is buttery smooth and moves effortlessly with absolutely no backlash or bumpiness in either direction, taking nearly two full revolutions from its closest focus (under two metres) to beyond infinity. The eye cups are of very high quality and twist up to give extremely comfortable eye relief. What’s more, they remain firmly in place even when significant pressure is applied to them. The instrument is fully waterproof(1.5m for three minutes) and is dry nitrogen purged to eliminate internal fogging when used in cold, damp conditions.
My glare and internal reflections testing showed that the Savannah has exceptional control of stray light and the result is that you get very punchy, high-contrast images. Indeed, the only binocular that has produced better results than the Barr & Stroud Savannah is my little Leica Trinovid BCA 8 x 20, but at a price fully three times the asking price of the former! It has noticeably superior control of diffraction spiking (tested on night light sources) compared with a Zeiss Terra ED 8 x 25 and the aforementioned Nikon Prostaff 8 x 30 and Opticron Aspheric LE.
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42(right) has exceptional glare and internal reflection suppression that is only just bettered by the premium Leica Trinovid 8 x 20 costing three times more.
The first model I acquired was second-hand but developed a dioptre fault. But I received a brand new instrument from the parent company who own Barr & Stroud,Optical Vision Limited(OVL) and the rest, as they say, is history. The model features fully broadband multi-coatings on all optical surfaces and phase coated Schmidt-Pechan prisms to boost light transmission and image contrast. It ‘s extremely sharp, even when compared with premium models. In one series of tests I conducted in the summer of 2019, the Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42 yielded images that were only very slightly less sharp compared with an optically perfect Swarovski EL Range 10 x 42. I believe the vast majority of users will be delighted when they look through this instrument. Don’t let zealous binocular gayponauts coerce you into buying a model costing many times more before checking this unit out first!
It might be all the 8 x 42 you need!
The large well-made eyecups and buttery smooth focuser on the Barr & Stroud Savannah make for supremely comfortable viewing.
The 8 x 42 serves as one of the best all-round binoculars for a wide variety of glassing applications, whether it be bird-watching, hunting in low light and for casual stargazing. Its nearly flat, super-wide field will delight those who wish the cruise the Milky Way or ogle large deep sky objects. The only downsides are its weight and slightly lower overall light transmission compared with premium models; at 820g the Savannah is not light by any means but I suppose that, in creating the highly impressive near-flat and super-wide field of view, it needs more optical components to execute this correctly and thus the trade-off is reduced portability and reduced overall light transmission. That said, unlike the two other binoculars discussed in this blog, the Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42 can easily be affixed to a tripod or monopod for ultra-stable viewing, should you require it.
The Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42; a truly remarkable value in today’s market.
This impressive binocular is always a joy to hold in one’s hand and the images it serves up keeps you coming back to it again and again and again. And while you can pick this model up for about £120, I would rank it as my personal favourite binocular. It’s just a supremely sweet instrument made by a company that once supplied optics to the British Navy during two world wars. And that counts for something!
Storing and Transporting the Binoculars
There is further good news when you purchase any of these binoculars. They all come with good quality carry cases. I have already highlighted the nicely designed yellow and black neoprene case fitting the newer Opticron Aspheric LE(illustrated earlier in this blog). The Nikon Prostaff 7s comes with a black padded case with the Nikon logo on the front and fits the binocular very well together with its strap wound tightly around the body. The Barr & Stroud Savannah has arguably the best quality case of the lot though. As you can see form the image below, the 8 x 42 comes with a hard clam shell case that can be zipped up to seal in the binocular and keep out dust and moisture – the destructive enemies of all optical instruments. As with all of my binoculars, I highly recommend placing a sachet of silica gel desiccant inside their cases, as well as leaving the caps for both the objective and eyepiece lenses on for added protection.
All three binoculars featured in this blog come with good quality carry and storage cases. On the left, the original Opticron Aspheric LE had a simpler padded case to the one now being offered. the Nikon Prostaff 7S case is featured in the middle, followed by the hard clam shell case of the Barr & Stroud 8 x 42 Savannah(right).
Well, I hope that you found this short blog useful. Above all, I hope you’ll agree that you don’t have to spend a small fortune to get good optical and mechanical quality. Indeed, those days are well and truly behind us! And if you take reasonable care of your binocular it will provide flawless performance for many years to come.
Thanks for reading!
Neil English is the author of seven books and several hundred magazine articles in amateur and professional astronomy. He has many decades of experience testing and evaluating all manner of astronomical equipment. You can help him continue this work by purchasing one of his books.
My Largeprint NIV 2011 (Anglicised)Reference Bible.
‘The days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The Lord Our Righteous Saviour.
There’s an old Chinese saying, “May you live in interesting times.” There’s no doubt that we do and then some. At a time in history when humanity is at its most creative, its most technologically advanced, a time when scientific knowledge has been increasing exponentially, it is also a time when mankind has begun to unhinge itself from the timeless truths and morals rooted in the Judeo-Christian faith, which held much of the western world together through a common culture and creed for centuries and millennia. Church attendance began to decline in the mid-20th century, slowly at first and then more rapidly, when in the twenty first century, many of these beautiful and age-old centres of Christian worship have been transformed into pubs, restaurants and nightclubs. This is part of what the Bible calls the ‘great falling away,’ where the end of days is characterised by a small, healthy, recalcitrant Church of true believers walking the narrow path, loyal to God’s unchanging message. I believe these trends to be no accident; this falling away was augured from the foundation of the world.
Deceived by silver-tongued atheist evolutionists (read fools) who disseminated their godless(and false) ideologies in best-selling glossy books and prime-time television documentaries proclaiming that we’re not made in the image of God, as the Bible uniquely attests, and that we are only highly evolved animals, our morality was destined to take a steep nose-dive. Abortion, once outlawed in all civilised nations is now fair game in many of the same nations, where today it has become the leading cause of death in the west, outstripping heart disease, cancer and diabetes. The same is true of homosexuality. Scarcely a quarter of a century ago, surveys consistently showed that the vast majority of people were firmly against it on moral grounds. Today, as activists in positions of power have lobbied(I would say bullied) our governments to normalise it, it’s now all over our television screens – morning, noon and night. And while one or two per cent of people identify as such, I find it truly alarming that nearly every second programme beamed into our living rooms has a theme or story related to these deviant sexual lifestyles. What’s more, for a career in modern showbizz, being openly gay has almost become a prerequisite!
So I don’t watch TV anymore and carefully vet all programmes my kids choose to watch, lest their minds be caught up in this campaign for immorality.
Men are now marrying men, and women do the same. They are raising children in homes where the traditional roles of father and mother are no longer considered important. With single-parent families now the norm, children grow up without the steadying influence of a mother or a father. Small wonder so many of our little ones grow up confused. And if the present trends in society are anything to go on, polyamory will become widespread and bestiality will also be normalised.
Our entertainment industries; Hollywood, sports, gaming and pornography, take centre-stage in many of our lives and have done much to erode traditional Christian moral values. Our children learn to kill efficiently and mercilessly with their joysticks, the films they watch are filled with gratuitous violence, infidelity, and blaspheming. Pornography is ubiquitous, tearing families apart. Our sports men and women and other types of celebrities have been elevated to the status of idols and we’re on our iphones more or less constantly, bombarding our senses with as much meaningless drivel as we can possibly soak up. Instead of seeking the true God, we lose ourselves in drug-induced trances. Who needs God when you have alcohol, cannabis, heroin, crack cocaine, crystal meth and so-called ‘prescription drugs’ to dope you into a false utopia?
While childhood used to be a relatively happy and carefree time of life, our young ones are now sexualised to the hilt. Indoctrinated by depraved activists with no respect for traditional values about gender or the family, the number of children receiving puberty-blocking drugs has skyrocketed in recent years, as has the number of teenagers and adults undergoing transgender hormone therapy and/or surgery. And yet, all the while, there has been an avalanche of such transgender individuals reporting that they regret undergoing such life-changing therapies, triggering severe depression in many cases and a commensurate rise in suicides among their members. This only serves to reveal the truth in all of this; transgenderism is a mental disorder, pure and simple, and many clinicians working in the field would agree with me.
With increasing wealth comes increasing materialism. We have larger disposable incomes than at any other time in human history, and yet our propensity for greed spirals ever upward and out of control. The ugly sceptre of human covetousness has led to great deteriorations in the salubrity of the natural world, with the collapse of whole ecosystems, the decimation of animal and insect populations, and all-out extirpations of hundreds of land-based and aquatic species. Without a shadow of a doubt, humans have proven to be irresponsible stewards of the planet and we won’t be given another one.
Many forms of counterfeit Christianity have emerged in recent decades. False teachers are a dime a dozen and very effectively disseminate their lying doctrines to their sleepwalking congregations, who have ever shorter attention spans and who resent being challenged or rebuked. Whatever you believe, however unscriptural it may be, you’ll soon find a pastor willing to tickle your ears. The internet is crawling with them!
Curiously though, all of this has occurred in lock-step with increasing knowledge of our significance in the Universe. Naive and ill-thought-through faith in Darwinian evolution led many scientists to suppose that extraterrestrial life would be the rule rather than the exception. But we are now more certain than at any time in the past that our planet is extraordinarily rare, if not unique in the Universe, and that all terrestrial life is far too complicated to have evolved naturally from the everyday laws of chemistry and physics that govern everything else in the inanimate cosmos. No, life comes from the mind of God. To deny this fact is sin. Life on Earth is God’s ‘Ace card,’ and human life His Royal Flush. We ain’t going anywhere either, to the chagrin of space-age dreamers. With the possible exception of our nearby Moon, humans are unable to travel and live on other worlds. The reason is simple; our physiology precludes it.
Lawlessness has greatly increased in recent times, with hardly a day going by before we hear of another terrorist strike, protest or war breaking out. The victims of these conflicts are usually the ordinary citizens, leading to the destruction of their homes, their places of business and worship and their livelihoods. Millions of people have been displaced from their homelands, creating the largest humanitarian crisis in living memory. Christian persecution worldwide has also greatly increased in our times. Coupled to all of this, the events surrounding the prophecies of Ezekiel (Chapters 36, 37, 38 and 39) are now aligning themselves in the Middle East. You simply couldn’t make this stuff up!
The bubble has truly burst!
Bearing in mind how human society has changed in recent years, would it be unreasonable for God to express His displeasure with us?
I don’t think so!
This pandemic is a chastisement from the Living God.
The Bible informs us that God expresses His indignation with His human subjects in a variety of ways; by sending freak weather – fires, floods, droughts and blizzards as judgements. He sends plagues, pestilences and earthquakes which, like Sun and rain, affect both the righteous and the unrighteous. He turns the wicked over to strong delusion so that they wallow in their lies and seared consciences. And yet, Jesus warned us that as humans become more wicked and depraved, all of these events would increase both in magnitude and frequency, just like birth pains, toward the time of the end. And this is the world we now inhabit. In one fell swoop, by allowing(but not causing) the spread of the Coronavirus, God has silenced the idols of Hollywood, the idols of sport, and the idols of health, wealth and prosperity. He has restricted our freedoms and our civil liberties.
God now has our undivided attention and the world would do well to listen. Perhaps most importantly, God is reminding us not to get too caught up in the cares of this world and that this is not our ultimate home. Everything we possess and covet will be burned up when God finally brings this Universe to a fiery end.
Of course, none of these trends come as a surprise to Bible believing Christians, who have been forewarned about them in the words of Scripture. Christians know and understand that the world ruled by man, with no regard or acknowledgement of the Creator, is doomed to failure and always goes from bad to worse, so that it is hardly surprising all of these events are converging in this day and age. And while I’m confident that we will get through this Coronavirus pandemic, there will certainly be other and possibly bigger challenges to come, especially if wider society does not repent. It also highlights the importance of understanding what God has planned for his people, and one of the best ways of gleaning that information is by reading the Bible.
Background to the NIV
Necessity, they say, is the mother of invention, and in the case of the New International Version (NIV), it was born out of a desire to share the gospel with those who had never heard it. It’s story began with one man, Howard Long, an engineer by profession based in Seattle. Possessing a strong Christian faith, Long spent a lot of his time travelling and liked to share his faith with others. Back in the 1950s, there were only a few Bibles penned in the English language, but the one most popularly used by evangelical Christians at that time was the old King James Version(KJV). But Long soon hit a snag; quite a few of the people he witnessed to didn’t really understand the KJV, as it was written in archaic English. And that got him thinking, “can a new translation be made of the Bible in contemporary English that accurately conveys the Word of God?” That question started a decade long consultation with Bible scholars across the nation and by 1965, he had successfully received support from the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals, who set up a new committee that would begin work on a brand new translation of the Holy Scriptures that was not based on any other existing translations at the time, and which would draw upon the latest Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic manuscripts. By 1966, Long had successfully garnered the support from 80 evangelical ministry leaders who established the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), an independent body overseeing the creation of the NIV.
Thus began the painstaking process of creating a new English Bible translation with the goal of attaining maximum accuracy and readability for a contemporary audience. Each book of the Bible was assigned to a translation team consisting of two translators, a couple of translation consultants and, where necessary, an English style consultant. Furthermore, another 5-strong team of scholars reviewed their work, comparing it to the original biblical texts and assessing its readability. After that, each book went to a committee of between eight and twelve scholars, as well as lay reviewers who offered constructive criticism on the translation in regard to comprehension and overall literary style. Finally copies were dispatched to working pastors, students and members of church congregations for general feedback. By 1968, the CBT secured a financial sponsor in Biblica, who oversaw the development of the NIV text, and by 1978 Zondervan became the official publisher of the newly completed NIV Bible. The first print run – amounting to a million copies – was sold out almost overnight.
The NIV was the first to use gender inclusive language, recognising that older translations tended to use male biased terminology to reflect the culture in which the Scriptures were first penned. An example can be seen in 1 Thessalonians 2:1. Here is how the KJV reads:
We beseech you, brethern……….
And in the NIV :
You know, brothers and sisters……………
The aim of the translators in producing more gender inclusive language was to make it more accessible to a female readership. In most cases, these changes are entirely inoffensive, as they do not detract from any doctrinal issue and render the text more natural sounding to a modern reader who accepts the equality of men and women as children of the Most High. But in other passages the use of gender inclusive language renders the translation somewhat corny or awkward. Take Mark 1:17 for example. In the KJV it reads:
I will make you to become fishers of men
Note how the NIV phrases the same passage:
I will send you out to fish for people
The NIV underwent its first revision revision in 1984. This version is probably the highest regarded among Bible readers and remains a firm favourite with a broad section of Christians. But in 2005, more revisions were introduced including the highly controversial Today’s New International Version (TNIV), which introduced gender neutral language to refer to people. Noting the tendency of older versions to translate humanity as ‘Mankind,’ the TNIV replaced many of the passages emphasising overtly male-centred language. An example will help illustrate the point.
Here is how the 1984 NIV translated Genesis 1:27
So God created mankind in his own image
The TNIV translates the same passage as:
So God created human beings in his own image
Many Bible commentators felt that this was a step too far, as it sought, they argued, to make the Bible more ‘politically correct.’ Taking these criticisms on the chin, the CBT brought out a new version of the NIV, discontinuing both the 1984 version and the TNIV. Called the NIV 2011, it toned down a lot of the gender neutral language introduced by the TNIV, making it more similar to the NIV 1984. Indeed the CBT stated in the introduction to the 2011 edition that, “the updated NIV you now have in your hands builds both on the original NIV and the TNIV….”
The interested reader can learn more about the NIV 2011 by clicking on the Preamble link at the top of this page.
Strking a Balance Between Two Translation Philosophies
Unlike old Bibles like the KJV, which drew upon a relatively small number of newer manuscripts( 12th century and younger), 100+ bible scholars working on the NIV included the Dead Sea Scrolls (which featured a number of Old Testament books), the Masoretic Hebrew Texts (which are the authoritative Hebrew scriptures, featuring 24 books of the Hebrew Bible), the Samaritan Pentateuch (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible attributed to Moses), the Latin Vulgate (a 4th century Latin translation made by St.Jerome that remained the official Catholic Church’s Bible for many centuries), to name but a few. All of these manuscripts were thoroughly read, translated and brought into modern English. The translation process was long, thoughtful, and in-depth.
Some critics of the NIV have stated that many verses have been left out or placed in footnotes when compared to translations like the KJV, the New King James Version(NKJV) and the newer Modern English Version(MEV). But The CBT were justified in doing so as many of the older manuscripts discovered in the centuries after the KJV was created do not contain such verses. The decision to do this was not at all intended to deceive, as some Bible commentators I’ve read have suggested but rather to clarify them as facts. For example, the ending of Mark’s gospel is presented in italics with a heading stating that, “the earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses 9-20.”
The ending of Mark’s gospel (chapter 16) in the NIV 2011 is presented in italics to emphasise the fact that many of the oldest manuscripts did not contain such verses.
A curious aside: Check out this youtube link to an NIV user who was villified by KJV onlyists. Such bigotry is, unfortunately, still alive and well today
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Most modern Bible translations draw on one of two translation philosophies; so-called ‘word-for-word’ and ‘thought-for-thought’ (sometimes referred to as dynamic equivalence) The KJV, NKJV, MEV and New American Standard Bible(NASB) and the English Standard Version(ESV) are highly literal, word-for -word translations, but many readers, especially new Christians, find them to be difficult to read and understand. The NIV is a thought-for-thought translation, and so often departs from the precise wording of more literal Bible translations in order to convey the essential concepts more firmly. That said, having read the NIV 1984, TNIV and the NIV 2011 in their entirety, I would say that all achieve a very high level of technical precision yet are easy to read. The language of the NIV is at a grade 7 level and so is suitable for all readers 12 years old and upwards. In regard to reading through the NIV 2011 in particular, I found it to be very enriching experience. And while it is a new and fresh translation, it is obviously respectful of classic translations like the KJV. The poetic sections of the NIV Bible, particularly the Book of Psalms, is arguably one of the best presentations I have personally encountered.
As an avid reader and collector of different Bible translations, I recognise the value of every version. What may be unclear in one rendering of the Word of God, other translations can help you arrive at a crystal clear understanding of the same text. Crucially though, the NIV, like all other modern English Bible translations, there is no change in doctrine between them. So you can be assured that in reading the NIV you will arrive at an accurate understanding of God’s message to humanity.
There has never been a better time to get back into reading the word of God, and the NIV 2011 is a great, scholarly translation that is both accurate and easy to read. But I would also recommend reading another more literal version of the Bible as well if you can. As world events continue to unravel before our very eyes, knowledge of the Bible will help you see the wood for the trees, so that you’re not frightened or caught off guard when disaster strikes. Time spent reading and applying Biblical wisdom will be added to your life.
Dr. Neil English is the author of seven books in amateur and professional astronomy. He delights in using science to debunk misconceptions about the supposed incompatability of science and faith.
Postsciptum:
The NIV is also available in both American an anglicised (UK) English
The NIV has also been translated into many other languages to reach millions of non-English speaking people around the world.
Like all good Bible translations, the entire text of the NIV can be accessed free online.
Two good binoculars: The Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42(left) and the Celestron Trailseeker 8 x 32(right).
Many binocular enthusiasts will often recommend a good 8 x 42 as the near perfect all-round instrument for birding, hunting and astronomy. This recommendation seems sensible enough given their medium size, weight and decent light gathering power for use in bright daylight, low light conditions and stargazing. But the increasingly popular compact 8 x 32 has also earned a respectable place in the hearts of many birders and sightseers owing to its lighter weight but greater light gathering power over a pocket binocular. But that raises an interesting question; which model is more versatile in the long run?
To begin to answer that question, I’ve spent some time comparing and contrasting the efficacy of two binoculars in these size classes; a Barr & Stroud Savannah 8 x 42, which I have written enthusiastically about in a past blog, and more recently, a Celestron Trailseeker 8 x 32, described in more detail here.
Let’s first look at the specifications of both models at a glance:
The Barr & Stroud 8 x 42
Fully multi-coated
Phase coated(probably silver or enhanced aluminium)
Retail Price: £125(recently reduced for clearance owing to the discontinuation of the model)
Performance in Bright Daylight Conditions
Both instruments serve up very sharp, high contrast images of well-illuminated targets with virtually no chromatic aberration(this is widely exagerrated by many reviewers but is actually not really an issue in any realistic situation. Indeed, in my comparison of smaller high-quality ED and non-ED instruments there has never been a target that I have imaged where ED glass made any meaningful difference to the viewing experience). The Celestron has a narrower field of view and a smaller ultra-sharp sweetspot. The Barr & Stroud displays a wider, flatter field with a noticeably larger sweetspot. The larger exit pupil on the latter makes viewing that little bit more comfortable, since positioning the eye over a larger shaft of light is easier to achieve. Both instruments generate images that are about equally bright under these conditions though. Near equal too is their ability to suppress glare and internal reflections owing to good baffling and high-quality coatings applied to all optical surfaces. The objective lenses are also deeply recessed in both binoculars, offering protection against rain, wind-blown dust, as well as serving as an effective barrier against peripheral glare.
I also noted slight differences between these instruments in colour tone when observing brightly illuminated daylight targets. The Celestron had a more neutral colour tone, whereas those of the Barr & Stroud were ever so slightly yellower and darker in comparison.
The focusing wheels on both instruments are notably different in field use however. The Barr & Stroud possess one of the best focusers I have personally experienced(indeed they have been very good in a number of other instruments marketed by the same company). It is buttery smooth and very easy to adjust in situations where rapid changes of focus are necessary. The Celestron focuser has much more tension in comparison, even after using it for a considerable number of hours in the field. When rapid focusing is required, the Barr & Stroud Savannah is clearly superior, which makes a significant difference when scanning fast-moving targets like birds flying across the field of view.
There is also a significant difference in eye relief between the two instruments. The Barr & Stroud has a whopping 18mm eye relief whereas the Celestron Trailseeker only exhibits 15.6mm in comparison. What this means in practice is that the latter is far more comfortable to use while using eyeglasses. I can see the entire field of the Savannah if I use my eyeglasses but it’s a lot more challenging with the Trailseeker.
The weight difference between the models is considerable however; with the Celestron tipping the scales at just over half the weight of the Barr & Stroud. Indeed the latter is one of the heaviest 8 x 42s currently available, while the Celestron Trailseeker is one of the lightest models in its aperture class. This has a significant bearing on prolonged use and transport in the field, where neck strain is effectively eliminated in the light-weight Celestron.
Low Light Performance
On paper, one would reasonably expect that the significantly larger 8 x 42 would prove better in low light conditions, such as those experienced at dawn and dusk, but my testing revealed some surprising results! In a nutshell, the Celestron Trailseeker proved to be much closer to the Barr & Stroud under such conditions! Immediately after sunset on several late January evenings, I found that both instruments produced very similar performance in terms of the brightness of the images garnered of a heavily lichen-adorned tree branch located some 50 metres off in the distance. Indeed, the 8 x 42 only pulled noticeaby ahead well into twilight when the last light of day was ebbing from the landscape. This seemed genuinely puzzling to me, as I fully expected the results to be well, like night and day. But why though?
The first significant difference between the models relates to the coatings used on the roof prisms in both instruments. The Celestron Trailseeker has state-of-the-art dielectric coatings that significantly improve its light transmission over a similar sized model with lower reflectivity aluminium or silver coatings. Maybe the Trailseeker has better anti-reflection coatings applied to the lenses making up the objectives and the eyepieces? The second thing that I noted is the significantly larger frame of the Barr & Stroud Savannah, which will have commensurately larger prisms than the smaller Celestron, with the implication that more light will be absorbed while traversing the former. That said, I still couldn’t understand why an instrument with 42mm objectives was not pulling very far ahead under such low light conditions than an instrument with only 32mm aperture objectives. Quite frankly, it still didn’t add up!
It was then that I realised that the best explanation possibly pertained to the size of the exit pupil under the same conditions. As any amateur astronomer worth his/her salt will tell you, the pupil of the eye is designed such that it dilates in low light conditions to allow more light to reach the retina. Indeed, this is one of the ABCs in telescopic deep sky observing, where a fully dilated eye pupil shows you much fainter objects than eyes that are newly accustomed to the dark. But while some dilation certainly occurs under low light, I wondered whether there was a limit to how much dilation actually occurs during early twilight, when the differences were observed to be most similar in both instruments. If my eyes only extended from say 2.5mm during bright daylight to a liitle over 4mm in early twilight, the extra millimetre or so offered by the 8 x 42 would be of no significant benefit. Maybe my eyes were just not capable of using the 5.25mm offered up by the larger 8 x 42 under such conditions?
I also noted that the tests on both binoculars were carried out more or less simultaneously for the duration of about 15 minutes, so not long enough to induce big changes in the ratio of rhodopsin(which reaches higher concentrations in darker conditions) to retinal(which exhibits higher concentrations in bright light conditions) In addition, the eye takes quite a long time to effect these biochemical changes, and most certainly longer than the 15 minute duration over which these tests were conducted. Moreover, rhodopsin is still rather labile even in low light conditions such as those encountered during the twilight sessions. However, these findings were quite in keeping with the subsequent experiences I had with both binoculars under well-adapted dark conditions; specfically under a clear night sky with no Moon.
Dark Sky Performace Compared
Donning some dark sunglasses I sat out in a deck chair for about 25 minutes after leaving a bright indoor environment to accelerate dark-eye adaptation. By then I was sure that my eye pupils had dilated to their maximum extent and the process of rhodopsin biosynthesis was well under way. Examining the region centred on Orion’s belt stars, I immediately noted a very significant difference between the glasses; this time the clear winner was the 8x 42 Barr & Stroud binocular. It was easy to see that it was pulling in more numerous and fainter stars in Collinder 70 than the smaller 8 x 32. The same was true when I critically examined the Sword Handle of Orion, and in particular, the marvellous gaseous nebula of M42. The 8 x 42 was very much superior, indicating that my eyes were indeed gathering in more light( as they should do) owing to its larger exit pupil of the 8 x 42 binocular.
That said, the 8 x 32 was more comfortable to hold over prolonged periods(several minutes), owing to its much lower weight and transmitted a surprising amount of light; far more than any pocket glass (25mm aperture or less) I had recalled from memory, yielding quite impressive views of star fields and open clusters like the Auriga Messier trio, then very high overhead in the winter sky. The slower focus wheel on the Celestron was far less of a problem under these viewing conditions owing to the relatively tiny focus adjustments required when viewing astronomical targets, and especially when moving from the zenith to objects imaged nearer the horizon.
Overall Implications
The Barr & Sroud Savannah 8x 42(left) gets my winning vote over the Celestron Trailseeker 8 x 32(right).
So which instrument is more versatile? Unsurprisingly, this is a deeply personal choice and, as such, there are no absolute answers. If you don’t mind carrying around the extra weight, then the 8 x 42 would get my vote. I just love the way the instrument feels in my hands, its solid, Spartan construction, wonderfully sharp, super-wide field of view and spectacular bang for buck. The 8 x 42 is exceptionally easy on the eyes with its very comfortable 18mm eye relief(compared to the considerably tighter 15.6mm on the Celestron) and larger exit pupil, so pulling well ahead as an astronomical instrument, or when glassing under deep twilight conditions. It’s only significant downside over the 8 x 32 is its lack of dielectric coatings on the Schmidt-Pechan roof prisms, but it more than makes up for this with its fine optical quality and sturdy mechanical design. Indeed, the 8 x 42 Savannah remains this author’s personal favourite binocular!
But if weight is a big issue and you like to do all or nearly all of your glassing during daylight hours, then a high-quality 8 x 32 will certainly deliver the readies and thus deserve serious consideration.There are some other models in this binocular size class that are as good, if not better than the Celestron, and at prices that won’t leave you out in the cold; the Vortex Diamondback HD 8 x 32(with its famous ‘no questions asked’ VIP warranty), the Nikon Monarch 7( 8 x 30) and the Hawke Frontier X HD, immediately come to mind, all of which retail in the UK for between £200 and £300 and well worth checking out. If possible, you should try before you buy to avoid disappointment.
Thanks for reading!
Neil English is the author of several books on telescopes and astronomical observing, but does not endorse bling. He is seriously considering writing a similar text dedicated to binoculars in the future.
PostScriptum: I intend to have my fully dilated eye pupil size measured on my next visit to my optician.
