The fiftieth edition of the Skeptics' Circle was published today over at Humbug Online. Check it out.

In honor of Carl Sagan, who died ten years ago yesterday, this edition is a memorial of sorts. To our regular readers, it's no secret that we are huge fans of Carl Sagan. From the Cosmos series to his numerous books and lectures, we can't get enough of the man, and we only wish that he was still around to continue to excite and inform us.

Carl captured the awe and the joy of a scientific approach to the universe in a way that few others have. Too many of today's scientists (and educators) are missing that vital spark of...perhaps we'll call it "inviting enthusiasm" that Carl had. Folks like Brian Greene do a decent job of it; though as much as we like Brian, he's just not as enrapturing as Carl was, and he's perhaps a bit less accessible to the layman. And while we certainly agree with most of Richard Dawkins' basic tenets, he simply doesn't make the public like him, and may thereby hurt the cause of knowledge more than help it. We aren't indicting Dawkins here — it doesn't take much to see that his approach to the unwashed masses closely mirrors our own — but we are saying that the valuable niche that Sagan once filled can't be filled by someone like Dawkins (or by us, for that matter). Of course, this kinder, gentler approach only goes so far as those who are willing to listen, and Sagan himself would certainly agree that there are those who are incapable of rational discourse.

Somehow, Carl managed to bring something gentle and non-threatening to his work; work which, while we know it flies in the face of all the "true believers" of the world, seemed to be embraced by many of them nonetheless. It's a rare talent, to be able to say point blank that someone is simply wrong...yet not outrage them. Surely the lithe and languorous, wonderfully meandering tenor of his voice had something to do with that. It's hard to get angry at someone who pauses and smiles so often in the midst of explaining tricky scientific phemonena, with a sidelong glance to the camera that slyly suggests: "Come on, now, you know I'm right!"

His writing was more direct — certainly because most of his readers were and are, by definition, fans of his already. Carl had a fantastic talent for dissecting a scientific concept or a silly belief system, examining it, and pointing out its strengths and weaknesses. His "Dragon in the Garage" will always be a big favorite of ours, as it nicely illustrates why it's so hard to "disprove" outlandish claims. Moreover, Carl's willingness to embrace varied fields of knowledge, from history and archeology to psychology and medicine, from literature and mythology to genetic biology and planetary geology, always makes one wonder why anyone would cling to bullshit when there's so much fascinating and real stuff out there to explore. Carl made no secret of his political and social views; but he also made no secret of the thousands of exhaustively studied facets of reality that informed those views. He truly exemplified the kind of human that the average Joe believes only exists in fiction: the scientist with a heart. At the core of every passage, underlying every assertion, was a basic compassion and hope for humanity as a species.

Carl Sagan's wonder and whimsy are sorely missed to this day. If you haven't already, be sure to watch Cosmos (which airs on Tuesdays on the Science Channel), and grab a copy of The Demon Haunted World and Pale Blue Dot. You won't be sorry.