Yeah, unless you look at Miller and Allais's work. A close inspection of all the interferometer tests conducted will turn up some surprising results. First off, all the interferometers in all the tests ever done detected a fringe shift. The debate centered on whether that fringe shift was due to an aether. All the tests except Miller's (which was by far the most extensive) declared a "Null" result. Which means to say they found fringe shift, but it didn't match the expected amount predicted by an unentrained aether theory. Entrainment is the theory that an aether would move along with an object moving through it. An example would be a blanket of aether being pulled along by the earth as it moved through space or some other mechanism that would reduce the flow of aether across the light beam thereby reducing the fringe shift found. Miller, suspecting this from previous experiments, set about conducting his experiment with the least amount of obstructions between the environment and his interferometer. He also conducted his experiment on a mountain top where he suspected the movement of the aether would be the most pronounced if it was entrained. This lead to criticism of his findings saying the fluctuations in his readings were the result of temperature variation and not the earth’s movement, but Miller was methodical in his approach and took extreme precautions to rule out temperature interference in his readings. The “temperature” scandal has its own interesting story behind it worthy of a TV drama. Needless to say, Miller was not so stupid as to not account for temperature variations. To my knowledge only a handful of short tests were done on object level entrained aether and no tests were done refuting the global entrainment hypothesis. Object level entrainment tests were done by shielding one end of the light beam with lead blocks. If the entrainment was at the global level, such a test could be expected to fail. Miller’s findings supported global entrainment after he finished conducting his tests. Miller's results, which can be found http://sites.google.com/site/cosmologyquest/peer-reviewed-papers/papers/Miller1933.pdf" [Broken]. It’s important to point out the differences in the way all the tests were conducted. To date, no one has ever done a full blown recreation of Miller's work; they have only done similar experiments, but not the same. Some have faithfully recreated the interferometer or even used better interferometers, but none have taken all of Miller's methodology into account. Miller's story is actually quite fascinating and politically charged. One could write a whole book on the subject so it’s kind of hard to get into all the details in a forum post. It is also interesting to note that gravitational wave observatories are really nothing more than super duper laser interferometers, direct descendants of Michelson and Miller’s light beams. A recent pronouncement by the http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126911.300-our-world-may-be-a-giant-hologram.html" states “For many months, the GEO600 team-members had been scratching their heads over inexplicable noise that is plaguing their giant detector.” The scientists go on to say this is caused because the universe is actually a giant hologram (LOL); however, such noise would be expected in such a sensitive instrument if a globally entrained aether was real ;) To date, no finding by any astronomical instrument has conclusively and indisputably ruled out the entrained aether hypothesis. I know this is a bold statement, but when you look at our current theories which are based in large part on assumptions and observation, you’ll find that there isn’t any single one thing we can point too that would irrefutably rule out Miller’s findings. The closest findings we have that rule out the entrained aether hypothesis are similar interferometer experiments done by Hammar, Gale, and Michelson. But again, no one has ever bothered to do a full blown recreation of Miller’s work, top-to-bottom, using all of his same methodologies. The papers critical of Miller’s work are controversial themselves because of the politics involved. Claiming temperature as the cause for the fluctuations which just happened to fluctuate in exactly the same manner as the earth’s observed movement in sidereal time, and they selectively discarded large portions of Miller’s data rather than looking at the entire body of evidence. If you’re looking for scientific drama, you’ll find it in Miller’s story.