  Black holes play a pivotal role in the foundations of physics, but there is
an alarming discrepancy between what is considered to be a black hole in
observational astronomy and theoretical studies. Despite claims to the
contrary, we argue that identifying the observed astrophysical black hole
candidates as genuine black holes is not justified based on the currently
available observational data, and elaborate on the necessary evidence required
to support such a remarkable claim. In addition, we investigate whether the
predictions of semiclassical gravity are equally compatible with competing
theoretical models, and find that semiclassical arguments favor horizonless
configurations.
