mains in the descriptive and roughly quantitative phase. This led to early in- 

 tensive investigations of small areas to a detail which was not justified in the 

 general understanding of the time. The size of the ocean demands that we ex- 

 ercise care in its exploration and early generalize concepts of processes so that 

 they can be recognized with the minimum of data. This requires intensive but 

 guided investigation of limited areas to arrive at an understanding of the signifi- 

 cant processes there so that this unit concept can be understood with appropri- 

 ate alterations determined by a minimum of data when it is encountered else- 

 where. Thus, instruments which can present a process by simplified criteria 

 so that it can be related to a more intensively studied example are the most valu- 

 able. Intensive and indiscreet data-taking in the absence of some unit concept 

 may be useless. C^'^ determinations may reveal upwelling far more effectively 

 than more complex criteria. 



Though the sea is large, man's instruments are small and much difficulty 

 ensues from measurements of variability that is not significant in the process 

 under investigation. Integrating instruments appear to be very valuable where 

 larger processes are being investigated, SOFAR signals, seismic exploration, 

 drift instruments and high-speed samplers can give us a much clearer represen- 

 tative of larger processes than can a great number of more highly resolved 

 measurements. 



As a result of the early development of many oceanographic methods in 

 restricted areas, much detailed information was obtained. As these methods 

 were extended to greater areas, as much or even more detail was considered 

 necessary. We must realize that we not only do not see the "woods for the 

 trees" but are blinded by the leaves, and major progress will not ensue solely 

 from initiating study of their histology but also from the development of methods 

 of pushing them aside. 



Third, the sea to most people is inhospitable and man concentrated much 

 effort on his ships. His instruments as they developed tended to be rugged and 

 more a product of the seaman than the scientist. Data taking was slow and dif- 

 ficult, and there has never been a great contribution of amateurs as enjoyed by 

 astronomers, meteorologists, and geologists. The amateurs of oceanography 

 have been drawn from a special class of seagoing people, and although this has 

 contributed freshness to development, it has not brought the wide range of ex- 

 perience that has been brought by amateurs in other fields. This inhospitability 

 and the size of the medium have made investigations very expensive and have 

 consequently limited the total effort. 



Fourth, the sea was dark and consequently mysterious; man knew that 

 he saw only dim shapes below him, and their activities were to him a closed 

 book. It was not so with birds and the clouds. The fact that the subject is 

 mainly obscured from our vision has had a profound influence upon our methods, 

 for we must probe blindly into the depths and visualize them only vicariously. 

 It is this limitation that demands instruments that can supply us with oceano- 

 graphic visualizations as readily as we can see clouds, rivers, mountains and 

 trees. Fortunately, water transmits acoustic energy freely. Acoustic meth- 

 ods, underwater photography, and thoughtful presentation of other data in a man- 

 ner acceptable to our minds someday may conquer this incubus. 



I would like to speak further on such matters as the intimacy of the bio- 

 logical element with the oceans and why ornithologists are seldom meteorolo- 

 gists, but marine biologists are always oceanographers, but I have spent my 

 timie discussing the ships and why the sea is boiling hot and must leave the 

 shoes, sealing wax, and flight characteristics of the pig for another time. 



