270 OCEANOGRAPHY 1961 — PHASE 3 



National Academy of Sciences Committee on Oceanography, the 

 groups within the Navy who prepared the TENOC program, the pro- 

 gram directors of the National Science Foundation, and all of the 

 governmental agencies participating through the Federal Council 

 for Science and Technology in preparing the recently issued national 

 program in oceanography. 



The work of these groups has resulted in carefully considered pro- 

 grams which reflect the intensive study and thoughtful collaboration 

 of distinguished legislators, scientists, and Government leaders. The 

 implementation of these programs is essential for their potential ben- 

 efit to mankind and is mandatory for our national security. 



Therefore, my comments should in no way be interpreted as evidenc- 

 ing other than appreciation and satisfaction that your committee 

 has studied with such care these recommendations for oceanography. 



The bill before you, H.R. 4276, proposes the establishment of a 

 National Oceanographic Council which shall, in addition to other 

 specified responsibilities, develop long-range plans for research and 

 development, coordinate the marine efforts of various governmental 

 departments and agencies, analyze budget proposals and report an- 

 nually to Congress regarding the status of marine science. 



I would not presume to advise this committee on the detailed mat- 

 ters of governmental organization but would note the unusual status 

 this proposal gives to oceanography, a status seldom given to any 

 scientific discipline or technical specialty. This is a status accorded 

 the engineering problems related to flying many years ago through 

 NACA and more recently, to space technology in NASA. There is 

 no comparable national council for physics, chemistry, mathematics, 

 or biology. 



We should explore the question in retrospect as to whether physics 

 would have advanced more quickly or with more benefit to mankind 

 if such a council had been established 30 or 40 years ago, when physics 

 was the specialty of a select few. Would a National Council for 

 Chemistry, established 50 years ago, when the center of chemical re- 

 search and chemical industry was in Germany, have assisted in the 

 spectacular rise of chemical science and associated industries in this 

 country during the ensuing 20 years ? I do not know, but I am sure 

 that the freedom to plan individual research programs and, to a cer- 

 tain extent, the lack of coordination, contributed to the free-wheeling 

 advances that have been so impressively a part of our strength in the 

 physical sciences today. 



The scientific research worker thrives on good communication, col- 

 lective thinking among his peers, and constructive criticism. He is, 

 however, easily thwarted by too much coordination and heavy-handed 

 long-range planning. The creative thinker needs above all else the 

 freedom to develop his own thoughts, to plan his own personal work, 

 and to control with the personal attachments of ownership his tools 

 of research. 



The head of a large laboratory in the chemical industry recently 

 said: 



The man of affairs, whether he be a business executive or military oflScer, is 

 rarely in a position to know what research can do to help him. He knows very 

 well what his current problems are, but his extrapolation to what his problems 

 will be in 5 or 10 years is seldom accurate. 



