I wouldn't downplay the importance of creating theories about how physical systems work.
Just to use the "aether" as an example, I believe that the Michelson-Morley experiment was intended to measure the velocity of the earth as it traveled through the aether.
Light beams were emitted in a pattern which caused the light to travel two different paths, with a portion of the two paths at right angles to each other. The experiment was repeated at different times of year, so that the movement of the solar system through the aether could also be detected.
The surprising result was that light was not a wave traveling through a stationary aether. The speed of the light was unaffected by the position or velocity of the earth. Both beams arrived simultaneously, indicating that the light was not propagating through a fixed aether.
The aether theory contained within its details the possibility of falsifiability; that is, it was possible to design an experiment that could prove that the aether theory was false.
If only the so-called "scientists" supporting global warming believed in such a concept. From what I have read, these "scientists" seem unfazed by the fact that the upper atmosphere fails to show the warming predicted by all the computer models. To a real scientist, any model which predicts upper atmosphere warming must be rejected as false. It's really not any more complicated than that.
We are circulating around the burning 'wick' of a candle, and we are in the 'flame envelope'. Is the 'behavior' of a planet different outside this 'flame' than one inside?
Is the effect they tested for altered by the Sun's 'aether' field ? Or is there an 'aether' permeating the entire Universe, and it's 'behavior' yet beyond our understanding?