1.  1. Does the contradiction between Millikan's unqualified statement that he has published all the oil-drop data and the evidence of unpublished oil-drop measurements in his notebooks prove that he is guilty of unethical scientific behavior? If Millikan had not claimed to have published all the data, would he still be guilty of questionable behavior?

    Yes the unpublished measurements are proof that he is guilty of unethical scientific behavior. He stated that he published all results, when he did not. The fact that he lied has taken away all opportunity for new discoveries. If he would have published all data, then the whole “sub electron” controversy would have taken place.
If Millikan would have said he did not publish all of his data then he would have looked very guilty. Either road that he would have taken would have made him look suspicious and possibly guilty.

2.  Should the fact that Millikan was a highly successful scientist, and that he got the right answer in the controversy about the charge on the electron be a consideration in judging his scientific ethics?

No, Even though Millikan was a very intelligent scientist, he is still responsible for the unethical choices he made. He does not have the right to choose the results he published. Millikan should have published all the results, whether he thought they were “correct” or not.

3. What criteria should be used in deciding whether data can be legitimately discarded? When a scientist uses his or her "intuition" as the basis for deciding whether to ignore certain data, is the question of the ethics of this action dependent on whether the conclusion reached by the scientist is later proven to be correct?

The only way that information could be considered to be discarded, is if the equipment is knowingly not working. If the experimenter knows for certain that the materials are tantalized or broken then he should be allowed to let go of the information. I believe that scientific intuition shouldn’t be a basis for ignoring certain data, even if it’s proven to be correct. You should allow the data to rule itself out, not your said “intuition”.

4. Is the intentional manipulation and selection of data in order to falsely prove a scientific premise less of a violation of acceptable ethical standards than the outright fabrication of data?

The intentional manipulation and selection of data is just as unethical as fabrication of data because either way, the person is lying about the outcome of their experiment. If the person does not give the real outcome of their experiment, they are lying to the public. When other people attempt to recreate the experiment and find different results, they will probably think they did the experiment wrong. This could cause problems because the public will think the results of the experiment are factual, but the results are actually not accurate.

2,

2