Chapline's ideas regarding black holes are speculative and not accepted by the scientific community at large. His "Crystal Star" or "Dark Energy Star" hypothesis has problems:
[Chapline] presents two major objections to the black hole model, one theoretical and one observational. The observational objection is based on the strong jets of matter shooting out from the accretion discs around black holes: these are not yet fully understood, although partial explanations have been proposed. It’s a challenging problem involving high temperature plasmas and strong magnetic fields, so failure to resolve it
may not be a problem with black holes as much as it is a problem with understanding accretion phenomena. The theoretical objection Chapline raises is that any object with an event horizon is incompatible with quantum mechanics. His reason is that there isn’t a universal time associated with an event horizon, which is a true statement: the passage of time measured by an observer depends on their motion relative to the black hole. That’s an inevitable consequence of relativity, but it doesn’t just apply to black holes: the measurement of time on Earth is slightly different than the measurement of time by a satellite in orbit (a correction factor GPS and other communication satellites have to make). In fact, time is always measured relative to an observer, and two observers moving quickly relative to each other will not agree on how much time has passed. That’s Einstein’s relativity,
and it is not controversial.
Event horizons are also not controversial from a basic understanding of general relativity (and in fact the 18th century physicist Laplace predicted something very similar to them!)
