00:00:00 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

00:00:24 Good evening.

00:00:26 My name is Jim Bradford.

00:00:27 I'm the awards administrator for our society.

00:00:29 I want to welcome you to our awards ceremony and the general meeting of our society.

00:00:37 The presentation of awards will begin promptly at 830 and will proceed without intermission.

00:00:44 It's my privilege to introduce our host for the evening, Dr. Kenneth Ashley from the Dallas-Fort

00:00:48 Worth Local Section.

00:00:59 Please enjoy the ceremony.

00:01:00 Good night.

00:01:01 On behalf of the Dallas-Fort Worth section of the American Chemical Society, I welcome

00:01:30 you to the 1998 awards ceremony and general meeting of the society.

00:01:40 This evening, we will present 51 awards to our most distinguished members.

00:01:47 We will present them in the order in which they were established, beginning with our

00:01:50 highest award, the Priestly Medal, which was established 76 years ago.

00:01:57 During the presentation of all of the 1998 awards, Dr. F. Albert Cotton, the 1998 Priestly

00:02:03 Medal, will give his address.

00:02:08 It is an honor now and a privilege for me to introduce the president of the American

00:02:13 Chemical Society, Paul H.L. Walter.

00:02:32 They call that power.

00:02:35 I now call the 1998 general meeting of the American Chemical Society to order.

00:02:42 I'd like to recognize some highly distinguished guests this evening.

00:02:46 Would all of the past presidents of the American Chemical Society please stand to be recognized?

00:03:08 Would all Nobel Prize winners also now please stand?

00:03:25 Our first order of business is the presentation of our oldest award and highest honor, the

00:03:34 Priestly Medal, to Dr. F. Albert Cotton of Texas A&M University.

00:03:42 The citation for this award is simple, but it contains much within it.

00:03:49 It is for distinguished service to chemistry.

00:04:05 Dr. Cotton will be back shortly to give his priestly address.

00:04:27 Our second order of business is the presentation of the ACS awards for 1998.

00:04:35 To assist in the presentation, I am pleased to introduce the president-elect of the American

00:04:40 Chemical Society, Dr. Adel Vosserman.

00:05:01 American Chemical Society Award in Pure Chemistry, sponsored by Alpha Chi Sigma Fraternity, to

00:05:08 Christopher C. Cummins, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for his contributions to the

00:05:15 synthesis of three coordinate complexes and the elucidation of their characteristic reactions

00:05:21 with small molecules.

00:05:24 Presented by Paul R. Jones, Grand Recorder, Alpha Chi Sigma Fraternity.

00:05:49 Francis P. Garvin, John M. Olin Medal, sponsored by the Olin Corporation Charitable Trust,

00:05:57 to Joanna S. Fowler, Brookhaven National Laboratory, for her pioneering work in the development

00:06:04 of basic general techniques for the synthesis of organic compounds with short-lived radioisotopes

00:06:12 and the utilization of these compounds in fundamental groundbreaking studies of human

00:06:17 biochemistry in the living brain.

00:06:21 Presented by Leon B. Anziano, Vice President, Olin Corporation.

00:06:34 A Patieff Prize to Andrew J. Gelman, Carnegie Mellon University, for his creative work in

00:06:42 the science of catalysis and tribology, and in particular, the understanding of transition

00:06:48 states for metal-catalyzed surface reactions.

00:06:52 Presented by Peter C. Stair, Professor of Chemistry, Director of Northwestern Center

00:06:58 for Catalysis and Surface Science, Northwestern University.

00:07:11 Olin Chemical Society Award in Analytical Chemistry, sponsored by Fisher Scientific

00:07:16 Company, to Richard N. Zare, Stanford University, for his invention, development, and applications

00:07:24 of laser techniques to analysis, including laser-induced fluorescence, fluorimetry, multi-photon

00:07:31 ionization, two-step laser mass spectrometry, and capillary electrophoresis.

00:07:38 His work has pushed the limits of detection to include single cells and molecules.

00:07:43 Presented by Paul Patek, President, Research Division, Fisher Scientific Company.

00:07:56 The Ernst Gunther Award in the Chemistry of Natural Products, sponsored by Jeeva Donroar,

00:08:04 to G. Robert Pettit, Arizona State University, for his uniquely vertical approach to the

00:08:11 chemistry of naturally occurring anti-cancer agents of marine organisms, ranging from isolation,

00:08:20 structure elucidation, and synthesis, to biological testing and clinical evaluation.

00:08:26 Presented by George Frater, Head, Chemistry Department, Corporate Research, Jeeva Donroar

00:08:32 Corporation.

00:08:48 George A. Ola Award in Hydrocarbon or Petroleum Chemistry, sponsored by the Morris S. Smith

00:08:56 Foundation, to Arthur R. Goldsby, Texaco, Incorporated, retired.

00:09:03 For his pioneering contributions to upgrading gasoline in development of a high-octane alkylate

00:09:10 blending component from light hydrocarbons by sulfuric acid alkylation.

00:09:16 Presented by Paul S. Anderson, Immediate Past President, American Chemical Society.

00:09:46 George C. Pimentel Award in Chemical Education, sponsored by Union Carbide Corporation, to

00:10:13 Stanley G. Smith, University of Illinois, for his outstanding contributions to chemical

00:10:19 education through his pioneering work in the use of instructional technology in the teaching

00:10:24 of chemistry.

00:10:26 Presented by Donald E. Gatewood, Manager, Recruiting and University Relations, Union

00:10:32 Carbide Corporation.

00:10:41 American Chemical Society Award in Colloid or Surface Chemistry, sponsored by Procter

00:10:46 and Gamble Company, to Eric W. Koehler, University of Delaware, for his distinguished study of

00:10:54 the thermodynamic and structural properties of complex fluids, including discoveries of

00:10:59 properties of surfactant mixtures, and for pioneering advances in the study of polymerization

00:11:05 reactions in such fluids.

00:11:08 Presented by Joel I. Schulman, Manager, External Relations, Research and Development Department,

00:11:14 Procter and Gamble Company.

00:11:25 American Chemical Society Award for Nuclear Chemistry, sponsored by the Gordon and Breach

00:11:31 Publishing Group, to Raymond K. Sheline, Florida State University, for his outstanding

00:11:38 contributions to nuclear structure studies, for his careful experiments, often with international

00:11:44 collaborations brought together by him, to use a large variety of techniques, and also

00:11:49 for his theoretical work.

00:11:52 Presented by Gerhard Friedlander, Editor-in-Chief of Science Spectra, the Gordon and Breach

00:11:57 Publishing Group.

00:12:06 American Chemical Society Award for Creative Work in Synthetic Organic Chemistry, sponsored

00:12:12 by Aldrich Chemical Company, Incorporated, to Paul A. Wender, Stanford University, for

00:12:19 his seminal contributions to the design and development of fundamentally new methods,

00:12:24 reagents, strategies, and concepts for the synthesis of molecules of structural, biological,

00:12:30 and medicinal significance, and for the innovative use of this expertise to design biochemical

00:12:36 probes and to elucidate biological modes of action.

00:12:41 Presented by Stephen J. Branca, Vice President, Aldrich Chemical Company, Incorporated.

00:12:54 James T. Grady, James H. Stack Award for Interpreting Chemistry for the Public, to Joseph Palka,

00:13:03 National Public Radio, for his informative and amusing manner with which he explains

00:13:09 the chemistry behind everyday life to the public.

00:13:12 Presented by Kathleen A. Schultz, Chair, Council Committee on Public Relations, American Chemical

00:13:18 Society.

00:13:23 E. V. Murphree Award in Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, sponsored by Exxon Research and

00:13:33 Engineering Company and Exxon Chemical Company, to Stanley I. Sandler, University of Delaware,

00:13:41 for his theoretical and experimental contributions to the solution of important problems in molecular

00:13:47 and engineering thermodynamics, and for his advancement of chemical engineering principles

00:13:53 and practice through research, authorship, and service to the profession.

00:13:58 Presented by Andrew Kaldor, Laboratory Director, Exxon Research and Development Laboratories.

00:14:09 American Chemical Society Award in Chromatography, sponsored by Supelco Company, Incorporated,

00:14:17 to George Zhivoshan, the University of Tennessee, for his fundamental work on the theory of

00:14:30 nonlinear chromatography and the development of its preparative applications, sponsored

00:14:35 by J. Russell Gantt, President, Supelco, Incorporated.

00:14:47 American Chemical Society Award in Inorganic Chemistry, sponsored by Aldridge Chemical

00:14:51 Company, Incorporated, to Bryce Bosnich, the University of Chicago, for his pervasive contributions

00:14:59 to synthetic and mechanistic inorganic and organic organometallic chemistry, which have

00:15:05 greatly enhanced our understanding of the stereochemistry of metal complexes and the

00:15:10 mechanistic aspects of asymmetric catalysis.

00:15:14 Sponsored by Mark Dresden, Manager, Techware, Aldridge Chemical Company, Incorporated.

00:15:26 The Peter DuBois Award in Physical Chemistry, sponsored by E. I. DuPont, Nemours and Company,

00:15:32 to Graham Fleming, University of California, Berkeley, for his innovative and pioneering

00:15:37 studies of the dynamics of solvation and the early events in photosynthesis, presented

00:15:43 by Louis Glasgow, Director, DuPont Corporate, R&D Planning, E. I. DuPont, Nemours and Company.

00:16:03 Frank Frederick Stanley Kipping Award in Silicon Chemistry, sponsored by Dow Corning Corporation,

00:16:10 to Joseph B. Lambert, Northwestern University, for his creation of new organosilicon molecular

00:16:18 classes, including the first examples of stable silylium cations, beta-silyl carbocations,

00:16:26 and dendritic polysilanes, presented by F. W. Gordon Fearon, Director, Central Research

00:16:33 and Development, Dow Corning Corporation.

00:16:45 American Chemical Society Award in Polymer Chemistry, sponsored by Mobil Chemical Company,

00:16:51 to Gerhard Wegener, Max Planck Institute, for his elucidation of the factors controlling

00:16:58 supermolecular architecture in polymer chemistry and physics, and for his leadership in establishing

00:17:04 the Max Planck Institute in Mainz, Germany, as the premier international institute of

00:17:09 polymer science, presented by Woo-Yung Lee, Technologies Manager, Mobil Chemical Company.

00:17:23 American Chemical Society Award for Distinguished Service in the Advancement of Inorganic Chemistry,

00:17:29 sponsored by Mallinckrodt Baker, Incorporated, to Herbert D. Kayes, University of California,

00:17:35 Los Angeles, for his synthesis of technetium carbonyl, and his fundamental discoveries

00:17:41 in the synthesis, characterization, and reaction of polynuclear transition metal carbonyl,

00:17:47 and hydride complexes, and for his tireless efforts in advancing scholarship, education,

00:17:53 and publication in inorganic chemistry, presented by Morris M. Bursey, Board of Directors,

00:18:01 American Chemical Society.

00:18:08 The James Flack Norris Award in Physical Organic Chemistry, sponsored by the Northeastern Section,

00:18:15 American Chemical Society, to Peter J. Stang, University of Utah, for his seminal and imaginative

00:18:23 contributions to modern physical organic chemistry, especially for the development of molecular

00:18:29 architecture via coordination, the generation of novel unsaturated reactive intermediates,

00:18:37 and the first preparation of acetylenic esters and vinyl triflates, presented by Michael

00:18:43 J. Hearn, Chair, Northeastern Section, American Chemical Society.

00:18:55 The Irving Langmuir Award in Chemical Physics, sponsored by the General Electric Foundation,

00:19:02 to Alexander Pines, University of California, for his many brilliant discoveries and inventions,

00:19:08 both theoretical and experimental, which have reinvigorated the field of nuclear magnetic

00:19:14 resonance, particularly of solids, presented by Robert L. Solin, Board of Directors, American

00:19:21 Chemical Society.

00:19:33 The James Bryant Conant Award in High School Chemistry Teaching, sponsored by Albemarle

00:19:40 Corporation, to Maria R. Walsh, Pike High School, Indianapolis, Indiana, in recognition

00:19:48 of her exceptional success as a teacher of high school chemistry, unique ability to stimulate

00:19:54 young minds, and outstanding contributions to the advancement of science education, presented

00:19:59 by Charles R. Everly, Director, Research and Development, Albemarle Corporation.

00:20:14 American Chemical Society Award for Creative Inventions, sponsored by Corporation Associates,

00:20:20 to Spencer F. Silver, 3M Company, for the novel invention and development of pressure-sensitive

00:20:27 adhesives with numerous applications, presented by Barbara J. Peterson, Chair, Committee on

00:20:34 Corporation Associates, American Chemical Society.

00:20:44 American Chemical Society Award in Applied Polymer Science, sponsored by Phillips Petroleum

00:20:50 Company, to Alan D. English, E. I. DuPont, in Amours and Company, for his innovative

00:20:57 research and development of a more complete experimental determination of the microscopic

00:21:02 structure and dynamics of polymers that has provided the framework for a better understanding

00:21:08 of polymer processing and mechanical properties, presented by Joel L. Martin, Senior Research

00:21:15 Research, Chemist, Phillips Petroleum Company.

00:21:25 American Chemical Society Award for Creative Work in Fluorine Chemistry, sponsored by Lancaster

00:21:31 PCR, Incorporated, to Gary J. Schrobilgen, McMaster University, for outstanding contributions

00:21:38 to the field of fluorine and noble gas chemistry, and in particular to the synthesis and characterization

00:21:44 of the first xenon-nitrogen, krypton-nitrogen, and krypton-oxygen bonds, and for his application

00:21:51 of multi-nuclear NMR spectroscopy and fluorine-18 radiotracer chemistry to the elucidation of

00:21:59 the structures of highly unstable compounds.

00:22:03 This award will be presented during the 216th ACS National Meeting, Boston, Massachusetts,

00:22:10 August 23 to 27, 1998.

00:22:21 Arthur C. Cope Award to Samuel J. Daniszewski, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Institute,

00:22:29 and Columbia University, for his magisterial synthesis of natural products, his wisdom,

00:22:36 humor, and winsome ways.

00:22:38 His work inspires us all.

00:22:41 This award will be presented during the 216th ACS National Meeting, Boston, Massachusetts,

00:22:47 August 23 to 27, 1998.

00:22:57 American Chemical Society Award for Creative Advances in Environmental Science and Technology,

00:23:03 presented by Air Products and Chemicals, Incorporated, to Mario J. Molina, Massachusetts

00:23:10 Institute of Technology, for his fundamental contributions to our understanding of the

00:23:15 complex chemistry of the Earth's atmosphere, leadership in elucidating the impact of human

00:23:23 activity on this system, and effective advocacy for environmental stewardship.

00:23:29 Presented by Fran J. Waller, Senior Research Associate, Group Head, Corporate Science

00:23:34 and Technology Center, Air Products and Chemicals, Incorporated.

00:23:44 Alfred Berger Award in Medicinal Chemistry, sponsored by SmithKline Beecham, to Monroe

00:23:50 E. Wall, Research Triangle Institute, for his advancement of the science of medicinal

00:23:56 chemistry through the discovery and development of the natural products Taxol and Camtothesin,

00:24:03 and serving as an inspiration to all to achieve their very best.

00:24:08 Presented by James Salmonin, Associate Director, Medicinal Chemistry, SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals.

00:24:22 The Nobel Laureate Signature Award for Graduate Education in Chemistry, sponsored by Mallenkraut

00:24:27 Baker, Incorporated, to Jacqueline Kiplinger, University of California, Berkeley, and Thomas

00:24:34 G. Richmond, University of Utah, for her discovery of transition metal catalyzed reactions of

00:24:41 saturated perfluorocarbons, resulting in controlled reductive defluorination to afford perfluoroaromatic

00:24:48 compounds and for the development and elucidation of mechanistic pathways leading to metal-assisted

00:24:55 carbon-fluorine bond functionalization under mild conditions.

00:25:00 This award recognizes research performed as a graduate student at the University of Utah

00:25:06 under the direction of Dr. Richmond.

00:25:09 Presented by James Farina, Senior Research Chemist, Research and Development, Mallenkraut

00:25:14 Baker, Incorporated.

00:25:25 Joel Henry Hildebrand Award in the Theoretical and Experimental Chemistry of Liquids, sponsored

00:25:31 by Exxon Research and Engineering Company and Exxon Chemical Company, to Erwin Oppenheim,

00:25:37 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for his far-reaching contributions to the development

00:25:43 of molecular hydrodynamics, the microscopic understanding of Brownian motion in liquids,

00:25:49 and the development of theoretical techniques for the study of transport processes in liquids.

00:25:55 Presented by Andrew Kaldor, Laboratory Director, Exxon Research and Development Laboratories.

00:26:06 Earl B. Barnes Award for Leadership in Chemical Research Management, sponsored by the Dow

00:26:11 Chemical Company, to Joseph A. Miller, E.I.

00:26:14 DuPont in Nemours and Company, for instilling the will to pioneer breakthrough technology,

00:26:21 for implementing a comprehensive technology agenda for growth and competitiveness in separately

00:26:28 linking technology and business strategies, and for his passionate support of science

00:26:33 education and technical excellence.

00:26:36 Presented by Theodore Tabor, Manager of Cooperative Research, External Technology, the Dow Chemical

00:26:42 Company.

00:26:50 American Chemical Society Award in Separation Science and Technology, sponsored by IBC Advanced

00:26:57 Technologies, Incorporated and Millipore Corporation, to Barry L. Carger, Northeastern University,

00:27:06 for his outstanding contributions to the separations community through textbook and research monograph

00:27:12 authorship, inspired teaching and research, leadership in separations research, particularly

00:27:18 with regard to bioscience applications, direction setting at the national and international

00:27:24 levels, and leadership in the founding of the International Capillary Electrophoresis

00:27:29 Meeting Series.

00:27:31 Presented by Neil Izatt, Vice President, Corporate Development, IBC Advanced Technologies, Incorporated.

00:27:45 Frank H. Field and Joe L. Franklin Award for Outstanding Achievement in Mass Spectrometry,

00:27:51 sponsored by Finnegan Corporation, to Keith R. Jennings, University of Warwick, for his

00:27:57 discovery and development of collision-induced decomposition as an analytical tool in mass

00:28:03 spectrometry, and for his application of it in structural elucidations of organic and

00:28:08 biologically important molecules.

00:28:12 Presented by Brian Winger, R&D Manager, Finnegan Corporation.

00:28:22 Lincoln Chemical Society Award in Organometallic Chemistry, sponsored by Dow Chemical Company

00:28:28 Foundation, to Aichi Nogishi, Purdue University, for his profound contributions of both fundamental

00:28:36 and practical importance to the organometallic chemistry of palladium and related late transition

00:28:41 metals, and zirconium, titanium, and similar early transition metals.

00:28:47 Presented by Cynthia Rand, Research Scientist, Contract Manufacturing, Dow, North America.

00:29:00 American Chemical Society Award for Computers in Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, sponsored

00:29:06 by IBM North America, Scientific and Technical Systems and Solutions, to William L. Jorgensen,

00:29:13 Yale University, for his pioneering computational studies of chemistry and solution, involving

00:29:20 both program development and seminal studies of conformational equilibria.

00:29:26 Reaction surfaces, host-guest binding, and drug-receptor binding mechanisms.

00:29:32 Presented by Angelo R. Rossi, Research Staff Scientist, IBM Research Division.

00:29:46 American Chemical Society Award for Research at an Undergraduate Institution, sponsored

00:29:50 by Research Corporation, to Rabindra I. Roy, Drury College, for his distinguished investigations

00:30:00 in the thermodynamic behavior of electrolyte solutions, and his remarkable success in involving

00:30:06 students in research and directing them towards careers in chemistry.

00:30:11 Presented by Michael P. Doyle, Vice President, Research Corporation.

00:30:23 Alfred Bader Award in Bio-Inorganic or Bio-Organic Chemistry, to Joanne Stubbe, Massachusetts

00:30:30 Institute of Technology, for her pioneering study of the mechanism of metal co-factor

00:30:36 mediated reduction of ribonucleotides by ribonucleotide reductase, and for her groundbreaking

00:30:43 work on the chemistry of bleomycin-induced DNA damage.

00:30:49 Presented by Ernst Eliel, Past President, American Chemical Society.

00:31:00 American Chemical Society Award in the Chemistry of Materials, sponsored by E. I. DuPont in

00:31:05 Nemours and Company, to Robert J. Cava, Princeton University, for his outstanding contributions

00:31:11 to the synthesis, characterization, and understanding of complex solid-state materials, particularly

00:31:18 high-TC superconducting metal oxides.

00:31:21 Presented by Stephen D. Ittle, Research Manager, Central Research and Development, E. I. DuPont

00:31:27 in Nemours and Company.

00:31:34 Ralph F. Hirschman Award in Peptide Chemistry, sponsored by Merck Research Laboratories,

00:31:41 to Isabella L. Carl, Naval Research Laboratory, for her procedures which form the basis for

00:31:48 all current computer programs that are used in a black-box fashion for the more than 10,000

00:31:55 new crystal structure analyses that are recorded annually in the Cambridge Crystallographic

00:32:00 Database.

00:32:02 Presented by Joseph W. Becker, Senior Investigator, Biochemistry, Merck Research Laboratories.

00:32:08 Ladies and gentlemen, joining us for the presentation is the award namesake, Ralph

00:32:14 F. Hirschman.

00:32:38 Princeton Chemical Society Award in Industrial Chemistry, sponsored by Axo-Nobel Chemicals

00:32:44 Incorporated, to William C. Drinkard, E. I. DuPont in Nemours and Company, retired, for

00:32:51 his discovery of homogeneous catalysts and the development of a process for the hydrocyanation

00:32:58 of butadiene, which has become the world's most efficient technique for producing a diponitrile,

00:33:04 a key intermediate in the manufacture of nylon.

00:33:08 Presented by Kelly B. Triplett, Vice President, Research, Axo-Nobel Chemicals Incorporated.

00:33:25 American Chemical Society Award in Theoretical Chemistry, sponsored by IBM Corporation, to

00:33:32 John A. Popel, Northwestern University, for his many outstanding contributions to the

00:33:38 theory of the electronic structure of molecular systems.

00:33:42 Presented by Joseph M. Jazzynski, Senior Manager, Physical Sciences, Research Division, IBM

00:33:49 Corporation.

00:34:00 Arthur W. Adamson Award for Distinguished Services in the Advancement of Surface Chemistry,

00:34:06 sponsored by Occidental Petroleum Corporation, to Kenneth B. Isenthal, Columbia University,

00:34:13 for his outstanding contributions to the understanding of equilibrium and time-dependent molecular

00:34:18 phenomena at liquid interfaces using ultra-fast, non-linear laser methods.

00:34:25 Presented by Charles G. Rader, Vice President, Technology and Development, Occidental Chemical

00:34:31 Corporation.

00:34:32 Ladies and gentlemen, joining us for the presentation is the award namesake, Arthur W. Adamson.

00:34:52 American Chemical Society Award for Encouraging Disadvantaged Students into Careers in the

00:34:57 Chemical Sciences, sponsored by the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation, Incorporated,

00:35:03 to Zafra Lehrman, Columbia College, for her tireless support of underprivileged and minority

00:35:10 students in discovering their own voices and improving their self-esteem and self-confidence.

00:35:17 And for pioneering teaching methods which incorporate students' interests and cultural

00:35:21 backgrounds into the learning of chemistry at all levels.

00:35:26 Presented by Robert L. Lichter, Executive Director, the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation,

00:35:36 Incorporated.

00:35:41 The American Chemical Society Award for Encouraging Women into Careers in the Chemical Sciences,

00:35:49 sponsored by the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation, Incorporated, to Madeleine M.

00:35:56 Jullier, University of Pennsylvania, for her selfless and continuing dedication to the

00:36:02 education of women in chemistry and for her ability to inspire women to strive for greater

00:36:08 achievement as exemplified by leadership in the chemical profession and in chemical education.

00:36:14 Presented by Robert L. Lichter, Executive Director, the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation,

00:36:19 Incorporated.

00:36:31 American Chemical Society Award for Team Innovation, sponsored by the Corporation Associates, to

00:36:37 Richard D. Markey, James D. Anderson, Ronald E. Chance, and Bruce H. Frank, Eli Lilly

00:36:45 Research Laboratories, for their discovery and development of Humalog, a human insulin

00:36:51 analog produced by recombinant DNA technology, which achieves rapid onset of action, giving

00:36:58 diabetic patients improved control of the disease.

00:37:03 Presented by Bennett C. Laguzza, member ACS Committee on Corporation Associates, and Director

00:37:09 of Neuroscience Chemistry Research, Eli Lilly and Company.

00:37:35 The E. Bright Wilson Award in Spectroscopy, sponsored by Roman Haas Company, to Robin

00:37:41 M. Hochstrasser, University of Pennsylvania, for his pioneering contribution to nonlinear

00:37:47 laser spectroscopy and the ultrafast dynamics of molecules in condensed phases.

00:37:54 Presented by James D. Burke, Manager, Research Staffing and University Relations, Roman Haas

00:38:00 Company.

00:38:15 Herbert C. Brown Award for Creative Research in Synthetic Methods, sponsored by Aldrich

00:38:21 Chemical Company, Incorporated, and the Purdue-Borain Research Fund, to Herbert C. Brown, Purdue

00:38:29 University, for the development of a new continent of chemical investigation, organoborane chemistry.

00:38:36 Presented by Clinton F. Lane, Executive Vice President, Aldrich Chemical Company, Incorporated.

00:38:50 Mr. President, this concludes the presentation of the Society's 1998 awards.

00:39:17 Thank you, Dr. Wasserman.

00:39:19 I now invite our recipients to rejoin their colleagues and families at their tables.

00:39:24 Ladies and gentlemen, could you join me now in acknowledging our honored colleagues one

00:41:01 Ladies and gentlemen, it's a great pleasure for me now to introduce our 1998 Priestly

00:41:17 Medalist, F. Albert Cotton.

00:41:21 Dr. Cotton is the W.T. Daugherty Welch Foundation Distinguished Professor of Chemistry and Director

00:41:28 of the Laboratory for Molecular Structure and Bonding at Texas A&M University.

00:41:35 He has held his position since 1984 and has been at Texas A&M since 1972.

00:41:42 Born in Philadelphia, Professor Cotton was educated at Drexel, Temple, and Harvard Universities.

00:41:53 He has been honored by 20 universities with honorary degrees.

00:41:58 He is a member of more than 20 technical societies, including the American Chemical Society, and

00:42:04 he was inducted into the National Academy of Sciences in 1967.

00:42:10 He has served on the editorial boards or as editor of 18 scientific journals.

00:42:17 Dr. Cotton has received more than 30 awards and prizes in the fields of chemistry.

00:42:24 The citation for the Priestly Medal is deceptively simple.

00:42:29 It says that we give this award for distinguished services to chemistry.

00:42:35 F. Albert Cotton has served chemistry in many ways and always in a distinguished fashion.

00:42:43 Ladies and gentlemen, it is my very great honor to introduce our 1998 Priestly Medalist,

00:42:50 Frank Albert Cotton.

00:42:53 Good luck.

00:42:58 I see you've brought my...

00:43:01 Thank you.

00:43:19 President Walter, Paul, Chairman Shields, Joan, members of the board to whom I owe the

00:43:24 honor of being here tonight, and to all of you ladies and gentlemen who have come here

00:43:28 this evening to honor those whom the society is recognizing for their scientific and or

00:43:33 professional accomplishments, good evening.

00:43:37 Before I say anything else, I want to say that I would not be here this evening without

00:43:42 a lifetime of help from other people.

00:43:44 My mother, who was widowed when I was not yet two years old, sacrificed enormously to

00:43:49 give me a wonderful childhood.

00:43:51 My wife, Dionne, has been the best, most supportive friend I could imagine.

00:43:56 And finally, whatever success I've had in chemistry could not have been achieved without

00:44:02 the support of several hundred talented and dedicated co-workers, including five secretaries,

00:44:09 one of whom, Beverly Moore, is here tonight.

00:44:13 There's no significant observation about human beings, human activity, or the human condition

00:44:18 that has not been already spoken or written many times, and no doubt with much more rigor,

00:44:24 more depth, and more eloquence than I'm capable of.

00:44:27 How then can I justify giving here a serious talk of a non-technical nature?

00:44:32 Perhaps it would have been best to take a stab at a humorous one, but I know only too

00:44:37 well that my capacity as a stand-up comedian is modest at best.

00:44:42 I also cannot sing, dance, or play a musical instrument so as to amuse anyone other than

00:44:46 myself.

00:44:48 What then should I do for the next half hour, which is my assigned time, to fulfill my obligation

00:44:53 as your after-dinner speaker?

00:44:55 I'm tremendously enthused about my current research and have fairly warm memories about

00:45:00 some of the research I've done in the past, but my own experience on the receiving end

00:45:04 of such a discourse, after a few drinks and a nice dinner, has taught me that at all costs

00:45:10 I should find something else to talk about, anything else.

00:45:19 I am therefore going to reflect on the last 50 years of science, 40 of which I call a

00:45:24 golden age.

00:45:26 Now let me say first that this is not the sort of talk that a research scientist like

00:45:31 myself is used to giving.

00:45:33 We scientists are normally very dependent upon slides or transparencies to guide us

00:45:39 through, and also we're used to talking about very technical matters to other scientists

00:45:44 who are interested in these matters, or to students who at least have to pretend to be.

00:45:49 Thus, I might be more comfortable with transparencies and material of a specialized nature.

00:45:55 Despite being somewhat out of my element in giving a formal lecture without visual aids

00:46:00 on a non-technical subject and to a general audience, I will however try.

00:46:06 Now my title refers to a golden age.

00:46:09 Now what does that mean?

00:46:11 A golden age is what someone defines it to be, and not everyone will necessarily agree.

00:46:17 For example, we have all heard the years of the Athenian democracy called a golden age.

00:46:21 No doubt the citizens of Athens would have agreed with that description, but the citizens

00:46:26 were not even a majority of those who lived there.

00:46:29 The rest were slaves, and one might not be surprised if they didn't share that view.

00:46:34 So it first behooves me to say what I mean by a golden age of science and why I call

00:46:38 it that.

00:46:39 What I'm referring to is a period of time during which I have done most of my research.

00:46:44 I started with it, but I have outlived it.

00:46:47 I started my Ph.D. research in 1952, two years after the National Science Foundation came

00:46:53 into being.

00:46:55 The year before, the Sputnik went up.

00:46:57 I was just getting my feet on the ground as an independent researcher with a lofty rank

00:47:01 of instructor.

00:47:03 Chris Kitt Cummins doesn't know what it is to be an instructor, but that's how we started

00:47:07 in those days, Kitt.

00:47:10 From the point of view of academic research scientists such as I, the events that followed

00:47:16 the founding of the National Science Foundation and the Sputnik really shaped three decades

00:47:21 and more of our lives.

00:47:24 The NSF constituted a vehicle for the support of fundamental research, and the Sputnik symbolized

00:47:30 the motivation for support of basic research by the American taxpayer.

00:47:35 There was, of course, throughout this period, from the mid-50s to the mid-80s, also much

00:47:41 more abundant support than ever before by both government and industry for research

00:47:46 of an applied nature.

00:47:48 But even modest support to academic scientists to enable them to do the research that they

00:47:53 themselves considered important and interesting without regard to possible applications had

00:47:59 never before existed in this country, with the exception of a very few special and quite

00:48:04 limited cases of support by foundations such as the Rockefeller Foundation.

00:48:10 The idea that a university professor or university professors in large numbers could obtain generous

00:48:17 support for research on fundamental problems in pure science based only on the say-so of

00:48:24 other university professors, the peer review process, was a very new thing.

00:48:30 I might note that somewhat the same idea became more or less a reality in the rest of the

00:48:34 developed world as well, but in this talk I'll restrict my attention to the events in

00:48:39 the United States.

00:48:41 Now before this golden age, U.S. academic scientists who wanted to do so-called curiosity-driven

00:48:48 or knowledge-seeking research had to do it on a shoestring.

00:48:52 If they could interest some company in the possibility that a profitable application

00:48:56 might eventually result, they might get some more money that way.

00:49:00 But that did not leave them free to follow the science wherever it led.

00:49:04 Now beginning in the 1950s and continuing unabated for about another 30 years, the majority

00:49:10 of professors who were interested in research in major universities were funded to do research

00:49:16 of their own devising, research done for the most part simply to discover how nature works

00:49:22 instead of to devise something practical, with practical meaning ultimately marketable.

00:49:28 This led to the greatest machine for the creation of new science as well as new scientists

00:49:33 in the history of the world, the American Research University.

00:49:38 Our system became the envy of the world and scientists from other nations, even those

00:49:43 nations with pre-war track records far superior to our own, England, France, Germany, and

00:49:49 Italy were eager to come here.

00:49:52 Many came as postdoctoral fellows, others as visiting professors, and many stayed to

00:49:57 enrich our scientific enterprise permanently.

00:50:01 Before the war, we went to Europe.

00:50:03 Now Europeans came to us.

00:50:06 Academic science as well as industrial science enjoyed enormous prestige in the general public's

00:50:10 mind, and many of the best and brightest of our young people chose careers in science.

00:50:17 Thus in academia we had professors, we professors, sorry, had prestige, money, an abundance of

00:50:24 good students, and support from senior co-workers.

00:50:27 If that wasn't a golden age, for academic science in particular but for science in general,

00:50:33 I don't know what else you could have asked.

00:50:35 It paid off in numerous ways.

00:50:38 Let me mention a few.

00:50:39 For one, there is such a thing as national pride, international bragging rights, prestige.

00:50:45 Maybe an accountant wouldn't have included that in arriving at a bottom line, but I believe

00:50:50 that many Americans think national pride is worth something.

00:50:54 Evidence of a sort of our leadership, which was nearly absolute in every area of science

00:50:59 for about three decades, is provided by the Nobel Prizes.

00:51:03 These prizes admittedly are given in only a few fields, and no doubt there are more

00:51:07 deserving people who don't have them than do, but the indication they give of U.S. dominance

00:51:13 in science is so dramatic that I think they're worth mentioning.

00:51:17 In physics, from 1901 to 1945, prizes for work done by scientists in the U.S. constituted

00:51:25 12% of the total.

00:51:27 Since 1946, 57%.

00:51:31 Similarly in chemistry from 1901 to 1945, prizes to Americans or those who did their

00:51:37 work here amounted to only 7%, but since then the figure is about 50%.

00:51:45 More concretely, academic science has produced the research and the high-tech workforce that

00:51:50 are absolutely essential to our industrial research effort.

00:51:54 We have gotten not only new knowledge, but research leadership in cutting-edge technology.

00:51:59 For example, in the chemical industry, which let me remind you, turns a huge trade surplus

00:52:05 year in and year out, currently at about $20 billion.

00:52:09 In aerospace technology, again a trade balance winner.

00:52:13 In biotechnology, in which we lead the world handily.

00:52:16 In the pharmaceutical and medical fields, and in still other areas.

00:52:21 Now you cannot be a winner in world technological competition without a workforce, or with a

00:52:26 workforce that just reads other nations' publications and licenses their patents.

00:52:32 It is essential that we produce the discoveries and the highly trained people ourselves.

00:52:37 That of course does not guarantee commercial success, as we have seen for example in consumer

00:52:42 electronics.

00:52:44 All of the basic discoveries in solid-state electronics were made in this country, but

00:52:48 nearly all the consumer electronics products, radios, television, being sold in this country

00:52:55 today are made in Japan.

00:52:58 What led to this situation is complicated, but it is important that we draw two lessons

00:53:03 from it.

00:53:05 One is that while it can be a great advantage to be the scientific source of the new technology,

00:53:11 it is not enough.

00:53:13 It is also necessary to deal effectively with the downstream problems of engineering, design,

00:53:19 and manufacturing in an aggressive and competitive way.

00:53:23 I think that lesson has been learned and needs no further comment.

00:53:27 There is a second point, however, that worries me more, and that is that we do not draw a

00:53:31 false conclusion.

00:53:33 Namely, that merely mastering the downstream functions of engineering, design, and manufacturing

00:53:39 are all we need to do, and that pioneering basic research is a waste of money.

00:53:44 As I have already said, just reading other nations' science and trying to commercialize

00:53:48 it is not going to get us to or keep us at the top in technology.

00:53:54 We need to make the early scientific breakthroughs ourselves and train our own people to the

00:53:59 highest level in the process.

00:54:02 Now, having discussed this golden age, the question might be, is it over?

00:54:09 To me, the answer is an unqualified yes.

00:54:12 Now what are the symptoms and what are the reasons?

00:54:15 The symptoms are evident to anyone engaged in basic research and even to those in the

00:54:19 more long-range type of applied research.

00:54:23 The concept of curiosity-driven research is now openly attacked.

00:54:27 The refrain is, why should the public pay unless they know what they're going to get

00:54:32 out of it?

00:54:34 Scientists are generally inept, if not usually downright uninterested, in trying to explain

00:54:39 to the public what they do and why they do it.

00:54:43 They are even naive enough to admit to the public that they enjoy what they do.

00:54:48 Thus, most people don't enjoy their work.

00:54:51 We do.

00:54:52 Thus, we have the confrontation so aptly captured in a title of an editorial in Science last

00:54:59 May, which was the scientifically illiterate versus the politically clueless.

00:55:05 You can figure out who's who.

00:55:08 That's blunt, but I'm afraid accurate.

00:55:11 Even those in industrial laboratories are finding it difficult to persuade management

00:55:15 to fund truly long-range applied research.

00:55:18 There seems to be a view that we don't need any more background knowledge, let alone basic

00:55:22 knowledge.

00:55:23 We don't need research, rather development.

00:55:27 Industrial support for what deserves to be called research and not development is, I

00:55:31 think, no more than half of what it was a decade ago.

00:55:34 DOD and DOE are spending much less on basic research, and scientists who seek funds for

00:55:40 basic research are being driven to the National Science Foundation.

00:55:45 And accordingly, the success rate for proposals at the NSF is declining steadily.

00:55:51 Because the NSF is the only agency whose explicit purpose is, or was, to support basic research

00:55:58 in basic science, its ability to fulfill this role is critical.

00:56:03 And yet even the NSF is beginning to succumb to popular and political pressure to be relevant,

00:56:09 meaning to do nothing that cannot be justified by its purported promise of contributing directly

00:56:14 to the short-term solution of an obvious problem in the lives of ordinary people.

00:56:20 Even ten years ago, I saw a small sign of weakening in the position of the NSF when

00:56:25 the term peer review was officially replaced by merit review.

00:56:31 Why?

00:56:32 So far as I can recall, because peer review is considered elitist.

00:56:37 But elitist or not, peer review has a specific, prescriptive meaning.

00:56:42 The merits of a proposal are to be judged by those who, like the proposer, are experts

00:56:47 in the field, and are thus able to judge merit on the basis of intimate knowledge and experience.

00:56:54 What does merit review really mean?

00:56:57 Clearly it means merit is to be judged.

00:56:59 But by whom and by what criteria?

00:57:03 Perhaps by bureaucrats.

00:57:04 Perhaps by relatively inexpert scientists in Washington.

00:57:08 Or heaven help us, perhaps by politicians.

00:57:11 The sudden change in label did not, I must admit, cause a sudden change in the process.

00:57:16 However, it provides cover and justification for slow evolution away from the ideal of

00:57:22 well-informed experts judging proposals purely on scientific merit towards inexpert persons

00:57:29 with extra-scientific agendas making judgments that are intrinsically not scientifically

00:57:34 informed or motivated.

00:57:38 Another symptom of the end of the Golden Age.

00:57:40 The public today seems quite ambivalent about science.

00:57:44 They thrill to exploits like the moon landing and the recent unmanned exploration of Mars.

00:57:51 And it seems to be generally regarded as desirable to call all sorts of things science.

00:57:56 We have at my own university social scientists, political scientists, poultry scientists,

00:58:03 and I'm not making this one up, tourism scientists.

00:58:09 But at the same time, the public seems to shun science in many aspects of daily life,

00:58:14 preferring totally unscientific, medieval, and indeed pre-medieval practices.

00:58:20 In spite of what we know about the planets and the universe altogether, there are obviously

00:58:25 millions of people, including at least one president's wife, several senators, and

00:58:31 the late President Mitterrand of France, who take astrology quite seriously.

00:58:36 Let us be clear about what this means.

00:58:39 These people actually believe that the planets, which simply follow Newton's simple, inexorable,

00:58:45 and utterly impersonal laws of motion, with an occasional relativistic correction, adopt

00:58:51 positions in the sky that determine what is going to happen in the personal lives of themselves

00:58:57 and all of the billions of people on the planet.

00:59:00 They believe that, depending on which constellation a certain planet may be in, it is or it is

00:59:06 not the right time to propose marriage, ask for a raise, or bet on a horse.

00:59:13 Such outrageous ignorance must be very widespread because hundreds of newspapers and other periodicals

00:59:19 offer a good living to the charlatans and or crackpots who write regular columns on astrology.

00:59:26 Millions of people still believe in crackpot medical ideas, such as wearing copper bracelets

00:59:30 or little magnets, or immersing themselves in water that stinks like rotten eggs.

00:59:37 Not long ago, a large group of people were so totally possessed by unscientific beliefs

00:59:42 that they took their own lives.

00:59:45 Despite the fact that they were intelligent enough to make a living programming computers,

00:59:49 they actually believed that creatures more intelligent than themselves were circulating

00:59:54 around the solar system in spaceships, waiting to welcome them into a glorious new and remote

00:59:59 world.

01:00:01 They believe this despite the fact that there is not one iota of scientific evidence to

01:00:06 prove the existence of any form of life, let alone super-intelligent life, now or ever

01:00:13 anywhere but here on Earth.

01:00:14 There are, of course, less tragic and often amusing examples of people who refuse to use

01:00:19 scientific modes of thought.

01:00:22 Take for example the weather forecaster who said, and I heard him in Boston many years

01:00:26 ago, that we could expect the rest of the month to be quite rainy because the normal

01:00:31 rainfall for the month is five inches, and here we were on the 15th and there had been

01:00:35 no rain yet.

01:00:39 Or take the case of the man who was concerned that there might be a bomb on board the aircraft

01:00:43 on which he was going to fly.

01:00:46 So he, quote, reasoned, unquote, that the chance of there being two bombs aboard was

01:00:51 so small that he could feel safe if he carried one on himself.

01:00:58 To take one more example that is not tragic but not all that funny either, there are apparently

01:01:03 many people who believe that a forked piece of wood held in someone's hands can tell you

01:01:08 whether there is water under the ground.

01:01:11 Of course, in many cases, this activity succeeds because there is at least some water under

01:01:16 the ground almost everywhere.

01:01:19 Now science doesn't get a very good press as it used to either, not even in academia.

01:01:25 Some of our outspoken academic brethren in the areas of art, literary criticism, social

01:01:30 sciences, and philosophy now regularly and very vocally engage in what I believe is called

01:01:36 post-modernist criticism, also known as deconstructionism, structuralism, or even social constructionalism.

01:01:45 Most people assert that science is a hoax, that scientific descriptions of nature are,

01:01:50 quote, social constructions, unquote, that science is no more objective than literary

01:01:55 criticism or the writing of poetry, that it is just another mythic system.

01:02:01 In their enormous ignorance, they make harebrained statements like, even Einstein showed that

01:02:06 everything is relative.

01:02:08 Now even a hare of normal intelligence would not make a statement like that.

01:02:14 Doubtless many of you have heard of a recent book by a man called John Horgan, a former

01:02:18 writer for Scientific American.

01:02:21 His book was called The End of Science.

01:02:24 Succinctly put, his thesis is that nothing important remains to be discovered.

01:02:28 This is not the time or the place to discuss seriously and in detail the wrongheadedness

01:02:33 of this.

01:02:34 I cite it only to support my point that science is not getting an awfully good press these

01:02:38 days.

01:02:40 Perhaps I will say one more thing for leaving Mr. Horgan to his melancholy fate as the Cassandra

01:02:44 of our scientific age.

01:02:48 Around the turn of the century it was, I believe, that some very sincere person wrote to the

01:02:52 President of the United States and advised him very sincerely to close down the patent

01:02:58 office because clearly all worthwhile inventions had already been made.

01:03:04 Well, so much for that aspect.

01:03:07 Why do I believe that the golden age has ended?

01:03:11 But there's the question of why the golden age of science ended.

01:03:15 Now two answers are very commonly given, but I don't believe either one is really valid.

01:03:21 One that we hear ad nauseum invokes the end of the Cold War.

01:03:25 What I think is absurd about this reason is that if basic science was essential to maintain

01:03:30 our technical superiority in weapons and war material, why is science not equally

01:03:36 necessary to maintain our technical strength in the international economy?

01:03:42 Another justification commonly heard is that we need to cut everything in the budget in

01:03:46 order to eliminate the deficit.

01:03:49 I shall comment on this further at the end of the talk.

01:03:52 I think that both of these alleged reasons for cutbacks in the support of scientific

01:03:56 research are only rationalizations.

01:03:59 I think the true reason is that human history in all its aspects is innately cyclical.

01:04:06 The bawdy 18th century was succeeded by the puritanical Victorian era, which has in turn

01:04:11 been succeeded by the present era of overt amorality.

01:04:16 Similarly, there are mood swings regarding science.

01:04:20 A pre-war era of genteel poverty was succeeded by the well-funded golden age, and now we

01:04:28 have entered an era in which the public is again rejecting science, as I have already

01:04:31 noted.

01:04:33 There is today much obvious evidence that curiosity-driven, i.e. truly fundamental research,

01:04:39 is really being squeezed.

01:04:42 There is a general public attitude that no research should be supported unless it can

01:04:47 be shown in advance in a way that is persuasive to people who are scientifically illiterate

01:04:53 that it will produce a practical payoff in the foreseeable future.

01:04:57 This attitude is manifested in an act of Congress passed in 1993 called GPRA, the Government

01:05:07 Performance and Results Act.

01:05:10 This act applies to the NSF, where its effects may be a classic case of the law of unintended

01:05:15 consequences.

01:05:17 No doubt this act was intended to force mission-oriented federal agencies to demonstrate that they

01:05:23 actually fulfill their missions.

01:05:25 For an agency with a mission of producing a material product, or at least a readily

01:05:29 measurable outcome, I think this is actually a very good idea.

01:05:34 But for the NSF, whose mission is supposed to be the support of excellence in basic research,

01:05:41 where a year-by-year demonstration of effectiveness is obviously impossible, this is not a good

01:05:46 idea.

01:05:47 It is indeed an impossibility.

01:05:50 The inevitable result of conformity to GPRA must be to change, to some degree, the way

01:05:54 in which the NSF operates.

01:05:57 That's a problem that they're struggling with, and who knows how it will come out.

01:06:02 One thing that has already happened is that the formal procedure for evaluating research

01:06:06 proposals now has two criteria rather than one.

01:06:10 The one that used to be the only one still exists, namely that the proposed work be of

01:06:15 high quality scientifically.

01:06:18 Now there's a second criterion to be met, namely that proposed research have explicit

01:06:23 and recognizable societal value, and that it be conducted in such a way as to contribute

01:06:29 to societal goals.

01:06:32 Exactly what this is going to mean in practice, I don't know.

01:06:35 At best, it will be construed very broadly, and I, for example, can continue to work on

01:06:40 the fundamental chemistry of the transition metals, employing the best co-workers I can

01:06:45 find.

01:06:46 At worst, I'd better start thinking about something like how to prevent bridges from

01:06:50 rusting out, because iron is a transition metal, after all, and that's supposed to be

01:06:54 my field.

01:06:57 Now what, in my view at any rate, lies ahead?

01:07:01 I think that what lies ahead directly for basic science is a period of difficult funding

01:07:06 and relative lack of respect.

01:07:09 I think those of us in the sciences and academia will be more and more pressed to do research

01:07:14 that has, or at least claims to have, short-term practical applications rather than the fundamental

01:07:20 work that we ought to do.

01:07:22 I also think that the best and brightest young people will increasingly prefer the surefire

01:07:26 material rewards of careers in things like investment banking, law, commerce, management,

01:07:33 writing computer software, and so on, rather than the intangible intellectual rewards of

01:07:39 unraveling nature's secrets and creating new paradigms of rational thought.

01:07:45 Even those who do work for a Ph.D. are being repelled by the difficulty they see their

01:07:50 mentors experience in attempting to obtain sufficient research funding.

01:07:57 How long this period will last is quite uncertain.

01:08:00 We're entering an era of human history in which utterly new challenges to the survival

01:08:05 of our race are emerging rapidly.

01:08:08 Only science will enable us to cope with many of them.

01:08:11 In time, I am sure this will be recognized, and there may then be another golden age of

01:08:15 science.

01:08:18 But in how much time, who can say?

01:08:21 For now, we had better batten down the hatches and expect rough seas ahead for a little while

01:08:25 at least.

01:08:27 What I would really like to see, to be on a more upbeat note right now, would be that

01:08:34 basic science should receive about twice the level of support that it now receives.

01:08:40 This statement may cause you to think, well there's a crazy academic with no sense of

01:08:44 economic or political reality.

01:08:47 The country is out to balance its budget, and this dreamer proposes increased expenditure.

01:08:53 He's off on cloud nine.

01:08:56 Well I'm not.

01:08:57 I'll tell you why, but first let me say I want to exclude medical research from the

01:09:01 discussion.

01:09:04 Medical research can be very basic, and Harold Varmus, the head of NIH, is strongly committed

01:09:09 to assuring that basic research is not shortchanged in the NIH.

01:09:14 But medical research is special.

01:09:18 It has the built-in enormous advantage that everyone can see why it is valuable.

01:09:24 Even politicians have medical problems and are therefore supportive of medical research.

01:09:38 It is basic research in the other areas of science that don't sell so easily, but can

01:09:43 clearly make effective use of more support.

01:09:47 Where should the support for non-medical basic research come from?

01:09:50 I would say mainly from the NSF.

01:09:53 I don't mean to slight other supporters on a smaller scale.

01:09:57 Indeed, as a Texan, I want to pay special tribute to our own Robert A. Welch Foundation

01:10:02 here in Texas.

01:10:03 It is very heartening to see how they have staunchly continued to be very clear and explicit

01:10:09 about the fact that their purpose is to support basic research in chemistry.

01:10:14 I am sure that it is Norman Hackerman, their chief scientist, who maintains their resolve

01:10:19 in this regard.

01:10:20 And I would just like to say what a huge asset Norman is to the state of Texas.

01:10:25 Nevertheless, to paraphrase what they say at the public broadcasting system, if NSF

01:10:30 doesn't do it, who will?

01:10:32 On a national scale and in all of the sciences.

01:10:36 I would advocate that the NSF budget for the support of basic research in the sciences

01:10:40 on university campuses should be doubled.

01:10:44 Is this fiscally realistic?

01:10:46 I think it is.

01:10:47 Of the approximately $3.5 billion in the NSF budget, the total budget, only about $1.5

01:10:54 billion goes for the type of research I'm talking about.

01:10:58 Well, $1.5 billion is about one-tenth of one percent of the entire national budget.

01:11:04 Another $1.5 billion would be another one-tenth of one percent.

01:11:09 Is that going to have a significant effect on balancing the budget?

01:11:13 The budget balancing process will succeed only if the big items, those that soak up

01:11:18 large percentages, not tenths of a percent, are brought into parity with tax revenues.

01:11:24 Once the budget is balanced, it can be kept that way only if we have the knowledge and

01:11:29 the highly trained people to assure our technical competitiveness and to deal efficiently with

01:11:34 the problems of ecology, pollution, and education that confront us.

01:11:39 We can afford another one-tenth of one percent of the federal budget for those issues.

01:11:45 They are things we have to do.

01:11:46 Recently, two senators, our own Phil Graham and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, have proposed

01:11:53 doing that and even somewhat more.

01:11:55 I hope they can rally the political allies that they need to make it happen.

01:12:00 In its 1999 budget proposal, the Clinton administration has proposed only a ten percent increase in

01:12:06 the entire NSF budget, with that mostly targeted to computer and engineering research and public

01:12:12 science education.

01:12:14 I simply don't regard that as adequate.

01:12:17 There is an immense amount still to be learned in the pure sciences of chemistry, physics,

01:12:22 biology, geology, astronomy, and mathematics.

01:12:26 I don't know whether it is ever going to be possible to know it all, but I'm dead sure

01:12:31 that we're a long way from knowing it all now.

01:12:34 I'm also dead sure that new insights into how nature works will inevitably bear fruit

01:12:39 in all areas of our lives, including the commercial ones.

01:12:43 This is not the time for basic research to declare victory and retire.

01:12:48 It is the time to get back into high gear and dig deeper.

01:12:51 You can't find gold if you don't go prospecting.

01:12:55 Now let me bring this to a conclusion with two more brief remarks.

01:12:59 One is to recall what Jack Roberts said in Denver in 1987 when he received the Priestly

01:13:04 Medal, namely that in his effort to determine the essential requirements for being a Priestly

01:13:11 Medalist, the most consistently common factor seemed to be, as he put it, maturity.

01:13:18 Or as he also put it, you have to ripen to get into the club.

01:13:22 I was reminded by this of the less euphemistic way that Gilbert put it in the Mikado, that

01:13:28 you have to be, quote, sufficiently decayed, unquote.

01:13:33 However you want to put it, getting the Priestly Medal does seem to take time, but it is a

01:13:39 very, very pleasing thing when it happens.

01:13:41 The ACS is a great organization, managing somehow to succeed both as a scientific society

01:13:47 and a professional society.

01:13:50 I was particularly impressed by how well this equilibrium has been maintained during the

01:13:54 last three presidencies under Breslow, Anderson, and Paul Walter.

01:13:59 It is important to continue to serve both purposes and to keep them in equilibrium.

01:14:04 To be recognized by an organization that is doing that so well is a great honor, and I'm

01:14:09 deeply appreciative of it.

01:14:10 Thank you.

01:14:11 Thank you all for listening.

01:14:41 Thank you so much, Al, for that thought-provoking address.

01:14:46 On behalf of all the members of the American Chemical Society, I congratulate you on your

01:14:51 achievements in research, teaching, writing, and service.

01:15:04 Ladies and gentlemen, I declare this meeting adjourned.