179 



And by way, to my colleague from California, I would just like 

 to say, amen, again, because every time Admiral Watkins opens his 

 mouth, it seems to me that a good deal of wisdom seems to come 

 out. 



The last set of things just added to that, the whole set of com- 

 ments about declassified data. 



But it would be an interesting test to see what kind of declas- 

 sified data we could get that would fill that wall over there with 

 the best ocean floor mapping data that is available at the present 

 time from classified or declassified information. 



And I use the comment from classified or declassified information 

 because I am absolutely fascinated by this set of conversations. 

 And I missed the original testimony. Quite often you can read that 

 if you ever have time. 



But it's given me time — this is a diversion — given me time to 

 look through this document and this document, which we were all 

 given as background for the discussion. And Admiral Watkins, to 

 take away slightly, you said that there are nine agencies. Well, 

 there are five of those agencies that are listed here. There are five 

 agencies listed in this MEDEA document. 



I looked through this carefully. I cannot find for the life of me 

 what MEDEA is. 



[Laughter.] 



(Clarification supplied by Admiral Boorda in Appendix II, page 

 196.) 



But it suggested that there ought to be inter-agency collaboration 

 among, in this instance, five agencies, not the same five agencies 

 that are here. And you mentioned nine. So I'm still missing what 

 the other three are because none of them are agencies which are 

 here at the table. Except that I do know that NASA is not here at 

 the table. 



Admiral Watkins. They're here in the room, though, Mr. Olver. 



Mr. Olver. Okay. I'm sure they are. They're also on the wall in 

 the room. 



[Laughter.] 



But as a scientist, I get much of my science these days from a 

 variety of magazines that come in. But also the popularized science 

 section, say, of the New York Times that comes out every Monday 

 or Tuesday, whichever it is. 



Three months or so ago, there was this wonderful article to me, 

 because I'm interested in geology although I was a chemist, about 

 the seamapping done by NASA. I think it's been declassified. I be- 

 lieve it was data that was done in the late '70s or around 1980 or 

 so, and they finally declassified it and made available a map, which 

 I immediately bought fi*om the University of California. 



Now I don't know whether that's a SEASAT satellite or a 

 GEOSAT satellite or what the hell satellite it is, but clearly there 

 are several different people doing essentially the same thing. 



That set of data, if I remember correctly — ^you may want to cor- 

 rect me because sometimes you get rather incomplete impressions 

 from reading those, even though rather long, whole page New York 

 Times with pictures and charts and so on and so forth, saying that 

 they were able to map at contours, I think, if I remember correctly, 

 two feet, but no greater than ten feet in mapping that was much 



