Talk:Robert S. Shankland

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Physics: Biographies Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Untitled[edit]

As User:Lethe pointed out, Shankland's analysis of Miller's experiment is widely accepted by mainstream physicists. The very few who question it are a tiny fringe minority; such arguments have not even been published in prestigious peer-reviewed journals, as far as I can tell. I've rewritten the article to reflect this, and also to add a bit of biographical information that I gleaned from an AIP web page. (I also moved the partial list of publications to the end as an appendix, since it otherwise interrupts the flow.) —Steven G. Johnson 20:59, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

There is no debate on if analysis of Miller's experiment preformed by Shankland is accepted by mainstream physicists. Very few who question it? YMMV on that. A tiny fringe minority? No ... there is a minority (but enough to be notable) ... your "Very few" POV is showiing here. As to the so-called "prestigious peer-reviewed journals", they didn't publish Alfven's work either. I've readded information that you deleted. Thanks on adding a bit of biographical information that you gleaned from an AIP web page. (BTW, The mv of the list of publications to the end as an appendix was a fair choice; a stylistic thing I guess) JDR

To what does the following sentence, found in the intrductory paragraph, relate?

The interferometry apparatus work continued from 1886 until July 1887 (including the buildings on the Case and Western Reserve campuses).

The dates given match nothing in either this article or at Dayton Miller. Lupo 07:49, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Santa Ana[edit]

What was this Santa Ana trip? For the first-time reader there is no way to know... Also, check the link, because Santa Ana is a disambiguation page. Is it Santa Ana, California? --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:33, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shankland's critique of Miller's research is wrong and biased[edit]

Details in this article: http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm, chapter "Shankland Team's 1955 Critique of Miller". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.27.28.86 (talk) 16:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]