tive lot; they did not welcome satellites with open arms. Apel came to Scripps and Woods Hole in 1970 to look for advice and support in planning SEASAT (Earth Satellite dedicated to Oceanographic Applications). He got neither. When mentioning that satellite altimeters would measure dynamic height, a well-known oceanographer replied: "If you gave it to me, I would not know what to do with it." With regard to climate, given the reluctance to employ new technologies, given that some of the underlying processes are not yet understood, given the slow rate (as demonstrated over the last 50 years) at which new concepts are adapted, and given the requirement of long time series for testing models, given that long time series take long times, we cannot expect to "solve" the climate problem in the next decade.
One final attempt at generalization. The key change between the century of the Challenger and the last 50 years is adequate sampling. The key product of the Technology Revolution is sampling. The key contribution of the conductivity-temperature-depth (CTD) profiler to vertical profiling was not more precision than the Nansen bottle (in fact it was less), but continuity in vertical sampling. The most important satellite contribution, I think, is not the instrument packages (remarkable as they are), but the ability to sample the global ocean and sample adequately. A key contribution of computers and the associated move from analog to digital discrete recording was that a new generation of oceanographers understood what the previous generation had not: the requirements of the sampling theorem. Beware of ignoring the theorem; it is unforgiving. Even the uncanny intuition of a Fritz Fuglister for the behavior of the Gulf Stream was not able to overcome the inadequate sampling of his time.
One person easily stands out in this brief account: Henry Stommel (Figure 2). Stommel joined Woods Hole in 1944 and died there in 1992. In his later years, NSF provided him substantial and continuous support. Stommel was the first to develop an intuition about the conservation of potential vorticity, with far-reaching consequences. In 1954, he privately printed a pamphlet entitled: "Why Do Our Ideas About Ocean Circulation Have Such a Dream-Like Quality?" Dream-like, indeed. An ocean with currents of 10 ± 1 cm/s (as we then thought) is an ocean far different from one with 1 ± 10 cm/s. My teacher Harald Sverdrup considered it one of the chief functions of physical oceanographers to provide biologists the background information for studying life in the sea. I am afraid that our concepts were too dream-like to provide useful guidance. Today we can provide information that is useful. Surely this is a revolutionary change! Stommel has led this 50-year transition from a dreamlike to an (almost) realistic ocean.
John Knauss discusses the transition from ONR to NSF dominance earlier in this volume. The changes are profound, nothing short of another revolution (Plate 6). (I must confess to a certain nostalgia for the old ONR days). This is an