History of Modern American History of Modern American Science and TechnologyScience and Technology

Session 4Session 4

American Science and American Science and Technology during the Cold Technology during the Cold

WarWar

Jokes for PhysicistsJokes for Physicists

““George W. Goes to Heaven”George W. Goes to Heaven” ““Suitcase Bomb”Suitcase Bomb” ““Ed’s Got a Bomb”Ed’s Got a Bomb” ““Less Edible Americans”Less Edible Americans” ““Top Twenty”Top Twenty” ““Garwin at the Guillotine”Garwin at the Guillotine”

Main ArgumentsMain Arguments ““Science in Policy” and “Policy for Science in Policy” and “Policy for

Science” Were ConnectedScience” Were Connected Rationale for Federal Support of Science Rationale for Federal Support of Science

Shifted during the Cold WarShifted during the Cold War American Science Advisers Most Valuable American Science Advisers Most Valuable

for Government due to Their Technological for Government due to Their Technological SkepticismSkepticism

The Goal of the President’s Science The Goal of the President’s Science Advisory Committee Was to Control the Advisory Committee Was to Control the Nuclear Arms Race and Promote Federal Nuclear Arms Race and Promote Federal Support of Basic ResearchSupport of Basic Research

Technological Dissent Key to the Working Technological Dissent Key to the Working of a Democratic Societyof a Democratic Society

Background on American Background on American ScienceScience

Leaders of American Revolution, Leaders of American Revolution, Newtonian Science, and EnlightenmentNewtonian Science, and Enlightenment

Debate over the Role of Federal Debate over the Role of Federal Government in ScienceGovernment in Science

John Quincy Adams’ “Lighthouse of the John Quincy Adams’ “Lighthouse of the Sky”Sky”

Technological Leap in Late 19Technological Leap in Late 19thth Century Century Scientific Buildup in Early Twentieth Scientific Buildup in Early Twentieth

CenturyCentury

Coming of Age of American Coming of Age of American ScienceScience

1920s: Institutional Strength, the 1920s: Institutional Strength, the Quantum Generation, and the Coming Quantum Generation, and the Coming of Refugeesof Refugees

World War II: Radar, Proximity Fuse, World War II: Radar, Proximity Fuse, Cryptology, and Atomic BombCryptology, and Atomic Bomb

Dominance of Federal Government in Dominance of Federal Government in American Science and TechnologyAmerican Science and Technology

Americanization of International Science Americanization of International Science and Internationalization of American and Internationalization of American Scientific Community: e.g., T. D. Lee Scientific Community: e.g., T. D. Lee and C. N. Yangand C. N. Yang

Impact of the Cold War on Impact of the Cold War on Science Policy Science Policy

Science Policy: “Science in Policy” and “Policy for Science Policy: “Science in Policy” and “Policy for Science” Science”

Dual Allegiance: Science or the Government?Dual Allegiance: Science or the Government? Science in PolicyScience in Policy

Scientists’ MovementScientists’ Movement The Nuclear Arms RaceThe Nuclear Arms Race H-bomb Debate of 1950H-bomb Debate of 1950 The Oppenheimer Case of 1954The Oppenheimer Case of 1954 The TCP Study of 1954The TCP Study of 1954

Policy for SciencePolicy for Science ONRONR NSF Debate of 1950NSF Debate of 1950 AEC and High Energy PhysicsAEC and High Energy Physics Who’s Using Whom?Who’s Using Whom?

Shifting Rationales Shifting Rationales for Science Fundingfor Science Funding

Bush Report of 1945: Assembly-line Bush Report of 1945: Assembly-line ModelModel

DuBridge-Rabi: Technological EvaluationsDuBridge-Rabi: Technological Evaluations PSAC: Technological SkepticismPSAC: Technological Skepticism Sputnik: National PrestigeSputnik: National Prestige 1960s: Education1960s: Education 1990s-present: American 1990s-present: American

CompetitivenessCompetitiveness

The Sputnik ShockThe Sputnik Shock

Rhetoric of American Technological Rhetoric of American Technological SuperioritySuperiority

Psychological Impact of Sputnik 10/4/57 Psychological Impact of Sputnik 10/4/57 Opinion Leaders vs. Average CitizensOpinion Leaders vs. Average Citizens White House Not ConcernedWhite House Not Concerned Sputnik “Has Done US a Good Turn”Sputnik “Has Done US a Good Turn” Political and Public PressurePolitical and Public Pressure ““Missile Gap”Missile Gap”

Ike, Sputnik, and PSACIke, Sputnik, and PSAC Soviet launching of Sputnik, Oct. 4, Soviet launching of Sputnik, Oct. 4,

19571957 Eisenhower meeting with the Science Eisenhower meeting with the Science

Advisory Committee of the Office of Advisory Committee of the Office of Defense Mobilization (ODM-SAC) in the Defense Mobilization (ODM-SAC) in the Executive Office of the President, Oct. Executive Office of the President, Oct. 15, 195715, 1957

Eisenhower announced James Killian, Eisenhower announced James Killian, President of MIT, as science advisor, President of MIT, as science advisor, Nov. 7, 1957Nov. 7, 1957

White House announced the upgrading White House announced the upgrading of the ODM-SAC as the President’s of the ODM-SAC as the President’s Science Advisory Committee Science Advisory Committee

Traditional AccountTraditional Account

Launching of Sputnik made Eisenhower Launching of Sputnik made Eisenhower realize the deficiency in the use of realize the deficiency in the use of science in policy and led him to establish science in policy and led him to establish the PSAC system of presidential science the PSAC system of presidential science advising.advising.

It was a natural and logical sequence of It was a natural and logical sequence of events that linked Sputnik with a reform events that linked Sputnik with a reform in American science advising and in American science advising and science policy.science policy.

A New PerspectiveA New Perspective

Eisenhower’s response to Sputnik and Eisenhower’s response to Sputnik and establishment of the PSAC system of establishment of the PSAC system of science advising were not pre-science advising were not pre-ordained, but shaped by a profound ordained, but shaped by a profound rethinking about nuclear war, a debate rethinking about nuclear war, a debate over science policy, and intense over science policy, and intense negotiations by rival scientists and negotiations by rival scientists and politicians over the meaning of the politicians over the meaning of the Sputnik challenge.Sputnik challenge.

Eisenhower’s Rethinking on Eisenhower’s Rethinking on Nuclear WarNuclear War

At a March 1957 meeting with ODM-At a March 1957 meeting with ODM-SAC: “re-evaluating war as an SAC: “re-evaluating war as an instrument of policy,instrument of policy,

Had focused on “Had focused on “how to deter war—how to deter war—which has now become so which has now become so destructive.” destructive.”

June 1957: June 1957: “There will be no such “There will be no such thing as a victorious side in any thing as a victorious side in any global war of the future.” global war of the future.”

A Major Pre-Sputnik Debate on A Major Pre-Sputnik Debate on Science PolicyScience Policy

Spring 1957, Eisenhower grew Spring 1957, Eisenhower grew concerned over the rise of federal concerned over the rise of federal R&D, including basic research fundingR&D, including basic research funding

ODM-SAC scientists defended basic ODM-SAC scientists defended basic researchresearch

Eisenhower agreed to protect basic Eisenhower agreed to protect basic research but DOD, in cutting R&D, research but DOD, in cutting R&D, went after basic research firstwent after basic research first

Scientists, including ODM-SAC, Scientists, including ODM-SAC, demoralizeddemoralized

Public Negotiation of Sputnik’s Public Negotiation of Sputnik’s MeaningMeaning

Rival scientists put different spins on Rival scientists put different spins on SputnikSputnik

Edward Teller in media and Congress: Edward Teller in media and Congress: Saw it as a military-technological threat Saw it as a military-technological threat

“worse than Pearl Harbor”“worse than Pearl Harbor” Called for a military-technological Called for a military-technological

response: “We must win the H-war before response: “We must win the H-war before It Starts!”It Starts!”

““we must overcome the popular notion we must overcome the popular notion that nuclear weapons are more immoral that nuclear weapons are more immoral than conventional weapons”than conventional weapons”

““we must revamp our military planning to we must revamp our military planning to fight and win a limited nuclear war.” fight and win a limited nuclear war.”

Werner von Braun also saw space as Werner von Braun also saw space as battle groundbattle ground

Moderate ScientistsModerate Scientists

I.I. Rabi in a meeting with Eisenhower:I.I. Rabi in a meeting with Eisenhower: Saw it as a challenge to American science Saw it as a challenge to American science

and education: Soviets might overtake and education: Soviets might overtake Americans in science just as Americans Americans in science just as Americans overtook the western Europeans a overtook the western Europeans a generation ago.generation ago.

Called for increased federal funding for Called for increased federal funding for science and educationscience and education

Test ban: Test ban: Rabi: Despite Sputnik US had advantage Rabi: Despite Sputnik US had advantage

and should enter into test ban with Sovietsand should enter into test ban with Soviets Teller: US needed to catch up; Soviets Teller: US needed to catch up; Soviets

could always cheat could always cheat

Eisenhower Chose ODM-SAC’s Eisenhower Chose ODM-SAC’s Interpretation of SputnikInterpretation of Sputnik

Nov. 7, 1957 Speech to Nation:Nov. 7, 1957 Speech to Nation: Announced ODM-SAC member Killian as Announced ODM-SAC member Killian as

science advisorscience advisor ““My scientific friends told me”: We are ahead My scientific friends told me”: We are ahead

but could fall behind if we do not increase but could fall behind if we do not increase support for science education and basic support for science education and basic researchresearch

Nov. 14, 1957, 2Nov. 14, 1957, 2ndnd “chin-up” Speech: “chin-up” Speech: ““My scientific advisers place this problem My scientific advisers place this problem

[science education] above all other immediate [science education] above all other immediate tasks of producing missiles, of developing new tasks of producing missiles, of developing new techniques in the Armed Services.” techniques in the Armed Services.”

Eisenhower Grew Critical of Eisenhower Grew Critical of TellerTeller

July 1957: When asked about science July 1957: When asked about science advising, mentioned Waterman (NSF) and advising, mentioned Waterman (NSF) and Bronk (NAS) as well as AEC and DOD Bronk (NAS) as well as AEC and DOD scientistsscientists

Pre-Sputnik (Summer 1957): Teller and Pre-Sputnik (Summer 1957): Teller and Lawrence made it “look like a crime to ban Lawrence made it “look like a crime to ban [nuclear] tests.”[nuclear] tests.”

““The scientists today in this field seemed The scientists today in this field seemed to be running the Government rather than to be running the Government rather than acting as servants for the Government.” acting as servants for the Government.”

Nov. 1957, Eisenhower complained about Nov. 1957, Eisenhower complained about Teller's Pearl Harbor analogy: “Scientists Teller's Pearl Harbor analogy: “Scientists have suddenly become military and have suddenly become military and political experts” and vice versa .political experts” and vice versa .

Funding SLACFunding SLAC

Project “M”Project “M” Rhetoric Shifted from Scientists to PoliticiansRhetoric Shifted from Scientists to Politicians National PrestigeNational Prestige Republican AcceleratorRepublican Accelerator Politics of Big SciencePolitics of Big Science Zuoyue Wang, “Politics of Big Science in the Zuoyue Wang, “Politics of Big Science in the

Cold War,” Cold War,” Historical Studies in the Physical Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciencesand Biological Sciences 25, pt. 2 (1995). 25, pt. 2 (1995).

Eisenhower, Sputnik, and PSACEisenhower, Sputnik, and PSAC Dec. 1960, Eisenhower to PSAC:Dec. 1960, Eisenhower to PSAC:

““A deep sense of obligation.”A deep sense of obligation.” ““noted that more and more he has tended to put noted that more and more he has tended to put

science advice into more and more subjects of science advice into more and more subjects of national policy.”national policy.”

Why?Why? Because they agreed on the meaning of SputnikBecause they agreed on the meaning of Sputnik PSAC was valuable to Eisenhower as an PSAC was valuable to Eisenhower as an

independent voice of science speaking on not just independent voice of science speaking on not just the potentials but, even more importantly, the the potentials but, even more importantly, the limits of technological solutions to social and limits of technological solutions to social and political problems that became fashionable in the political problems that became fashionable in the wake of Sputnik.wake of Sputnik.

Sputnik’s Shadow: Sputnik’s Shadow: Our own new age of technological enthusiasmOur own new age of technological enthusiasm Operation “Shock and Awe”Operation “Shock and Awe” We still need independent and expert voices of We still need independent and expert voices of

technological skepticismtechnological skepticism

Eisenhower’s Thinking on Eisenhower’s Thinking on Science, Defense, and SpaceScience, Defense, and Space

First Concern over National SecurityFirst Concern over National Security Deterrence: Sufficiency, Not ExcessDeterrence: Sufficiency, Not Excess Against Glamorous Space ProjectsAgainst Glamorous Space Projects No Enemy on the MoonNo Enemy on the Moon Genuine Interest in Space Exploration and Genuine Interest in Space Exploration and

Basic ResearchBasic Research Saw Danger of Intensified Inter-Service Saw Danger of Intensified Inter-Service

RivalryRivalry Concerned with Garrison State, Big Concerned with Garrison State, Big

Government, and Momentum of Military Government, and Momentum of Military Industrial Complex Industrial Complex

Eisenhower’s Legacy in Space Eisenhower’s Legacy in Space and Public Policyand Public Policy

Space Program Should Be Guided by “Reason, Fact Space Program Should Be Guided by “Reason, Fact and Logic”and Logic”

Priorities Should Go to Scientific Exploration and Priorities Should Go to Scientific Exploration and National Security but Not Propaganda StuntsNational Security but Not Propaganda Stunts

Policy Makers Should Try to Understand the Scientific Policy Makers Should Try to Understand the Scientific and Technical Aspects of Public Policy such as in and Technical Aspects of Public Policy such as in SpaceSpace

Policy Makers Should Be Aware of Unwarranted Policy Makers Should Be Aware of Unwarranted Influence of Interested Parties in Pushing Space Influence of Interested Parties in Pushing Space Program in One Direction or AnotherProgram in One Direction or Another

Public Understanding and Support Are Key to Public Understanding and Support Are Key to Successful Public Policy Successful Public Policy

Foreign Policy Should Be Made on the Basis of Foreign Policy Should Be Made on the Basis of Accurate Intelligence and Understanding of the Limit Accurate Intelligence and Understanding of the Limit of Am. Powerof Am. Power

Scientists Represent an Important, Independent Scientists Represent an Important, Independent Voice in Public Policy, including Space and Defense Voice in Public Policy, including Space and Defense PolicyPolicy

Post-Eisenhower Post-Eisenhower Space DevelopmentSpace Development

Kennedy Launched Apollo against PSAC Kennedy Launched Apollo against PSAC AdviceAdvice

American Scientists Ambivalent toward ApolloAmerican Scientists Ambivalent toward Apollo Excited about Landing but Misgiving about Excited about Landing but Misgiving about

Illusion of Technological Fixes and Impact on Illusion of Technological Fixes and Impact on Subsequent Direction of American Space Subsequent Direction of American Space ProgramProgram

JPL Mars Rovers Punctured Myth that Only JPL Mars Rovers Punctured Myth that Only Man-in-Space Can Stir Public InterestMan-in-Space Can Stir Public Interest

After Apollo Decision, PSAC Scientists Helped After Apollo Decision, PSAC Scientists Helped to Ensure Its Successto Ensure Its Success

New Members also Supported Manned Space New Members also Supported Manned Space for Institutional Benefitsfor Institutional Benefits

PSAC and Environmental PolicyPSAC and Environmental Policy Use of PesticidesUse of Pesticides (1963), (1963), Report that Report that

vindicated Rachel Carson’s vindicated Rachel Carson’s Silent SpringSilent Spring Better science to control technological excessBetter science to control technological excess Public right to knowPublic right to know Cautionary principleCautionary principle Dynamic process of regulationDynamic process of regulation Wang, “Responding to Wang, “Responding to Silent SpringSilent Spring,” ,” Science Science

CommunicationCommunication 19, no. 4 (Dec. 1997). 19, no. 4 (Dec. 1997). Restoring the Quality of Our Restoring the Quality of Our

Environment Environment (1965), warning of global (1965), warning of global warmingwarming ““By the year 2000 there will be about 25% By the year 2000 there will be about 25%

more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere than more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere than at present.” at present.”

““This will modify the heat balance of the This will modify the heat balance of the atmosphere to such an extent that marked atmosphere to such an extent that marked changes in climate, not controllable through changes in climate, not controllable through local or even national efforts, could occur.” local or even national efforts, could occur.”

Vietnam War EraVietnam War Era Increasing Questioning of Priority Increasing Questioning of Priority

of Manned Spaceof Manned Space Vietnam War Polarized American Vietnam War Polarized American

Society and Scientific CommunitySociety and Scientific Community PSAC Opposed Anti-Ballistic PSAC Opposed Anti-Ballistic

Missiles (ABM) and Supersonic Missiles (ABM) and Supersonic Transport (SST) in late 1960s and Transport (SST) in late 1960s and early 1970searly 1970s

PSAC also Opposed Vietnam War PSAC also Opposed Vietnam War as Misguided Use of American as Misguided Use of American Technological-Military PowerTechnological-Military Power

Nixon Abolished PSAC in 1973Nixon Abolished PSAC in 1973 Science Funding Declined during Science Funding Declined during

the Vietnam War Periodthe Vietnam War Period

Current Debate over Science, Current Debate over Science, Defense, and Space PolicyDefense, and Space Policy

George W. Bush: No Science Advisor until after 9/11George W. Bush: No Science Advisor until after 9/11 Jack Marburg (physicist): “Invisible Science Advisor” (Bob Jack Marburg (physicist): “Invisible Science Advisor” (Bob

Park, “What’s New,” 2/22/2008)Park, “What’s New,” 2/22/2008) Ambitious Human Return to the Moon and Landing on Mars Ambitious Human Return to the Moon and Landing on Mars

in View of China’s and India’s Featsin View of China’s and India’s Feats But Budget Cuts on Scientific Exploration of SpaceBut Budget Cuts on Scientific Exploration of Space Political Benefits to Southern (Red?) States?Political Benefits to Southern (Red?) States? Hilary Clinton: Reorient Space Program to Focus on Hilary Clinton: Reorient Space Program to Focus on

Scientific Exploration and Environmental Problems on Earth Scientific Exploration and Environmental Problems on Earth Attacks on Scientific Integrity in Bush Administration:Attacks on Scientific Integrity in Bush Administration:

““Do You Support the President Politically?”Do You Support the President Politically?” Censorship over Global WarmingCensorship over Global Warming Stem Cell ResearchStem Cell Research Support for Intelligent DesignSupport for Intelligent Design

Union of Concerned Scientists campaign for the integrity of Union of Concerned Scientists campaign for the integrity of science in the federal government: science in the federal government: www.ucsusa.orgwww.ucsusa.org

We Still Need “Voice of Sense and Moderation” and Dissent We Still Need “Voice of Sense and Moderation” and Dissent of Independent Scientists in the White House—an Important of Independent Scientists in the White House—an Important Part of Eisenhower’s LegacyPart of Eisenhower’s Legacy

For Further Reading and For Further Reading and InvolvementInvolvement

Zuoyue Wang, Zuoyue Wang, In Sputnik’s Shadow: The In Sputnik’s Shadow: The President’s Science Advisory Committee President’s Science Advisory Committee and Cold War Americaand Cold War America and and articles on articles on website: website: www.csupomona.edu/~zywangwww.csupomona.edu/~zywang

Daniel Kevles, Daniel Kevles, The PhysicistsThe Physicists Union of Concerned Scientists website (Union of Concerned Scientists website (

www.ucsusa.orgwww.ucsusa.org)) –sign petition on –sign petition on “Scientific Integrity”“Scientific Integrity”

Robert Park of APS, “What’s New,” weekly Robert Park of APS, “What’s New,” weekly email on science and politics and website: email on science and politics and website: http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/index.htmlhttp://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/index.html