Evidence — Yes; “Proof” — No!

In the article it is correctly noted that Pan-STARRS research is consistent with the reality of event horizons for the very large number of black holes populating the cosmos. But the use of the term “proof” in the title is unfortunate.

No one in that research group is talking publicly about “proof”, especially when it is based on negative and indirect results.

Shouldn’t we be more careful in how science is presented to the public? Don’t scientists have a responsibility to avoid hype so as not to mislead?