Let's compare two theories. One is Newton's gravity, the other Luminiferous Aether. When Einstein's theory of relativity arrived, Newton's Gravity turned to be a subset of it, an approximation that works under specific conditions.
On the other hand, Luminiferous Aether is just plain wrong.
Now, imagine that a scientist in the era before Theory of Relativity built a Strong AI (just roll with me here :-) ) and tasked it with finding out why Newton's Gravity doesn't work quite right around Mercury. The AI derived the Theory of Relativity.
Now, imagine this scientist asking the AI what Luminiferous Aether is made from. The AI is going to throw an OutOfLuminiferousAether exception (don't ask me why the AI is written in Java).
Humorous prelude aside, I am wondering which concepts we have today are only slightly wrong, and which are completely wrong? I am asking mostly about the concepts that are discussed on this forum.
Obviously, the more abstract is the concept, the more risk there that it will turn out to be bunkum.
Personally, I don't trust the concept of values. It's already so complex and fragile, I'm afraid it doesn't actually exist.
Taboo 'consciousness', and attempt to make that assumption still work.
The feasibility of this idea is inversely proportional to the resource expenditure required to remain invisible. It is more likely that - if aliens exist - that they are naturally mostly-invisible as a result of computational optimization into compact cold dark arcilects. If stealth/invisibility plays a role, they are more likely to be hiding from other powerful civs rather than us.
Taboo 'intelligence' as well.