Black holes? A bad name?, Has the name given a wrong image?

If black holes are right according to the theory of gravity Einstein said that light slows down in slower time. If this is true there can't be any black holes(as he thought) because as time slows down in lights approach to the horizon light would come to a complete halt where time ends(event horizon.) So light and everything else couldn't go in being stuck on the edge. Where time ends nothing can move.

Black holes are a bad name. I call them Dark Holes. And we know they are not invisible but are ejecting massive amount of matter/energy out their magnetic poles.

Black holes eject.

Zepher, I was more referring to the idea that Dark Matter has been "invented" to explain gaps in theory, much the way theorists in Newtons time used ether (sorry, probably using the wrong word) to explain lights wave properties (until Michelson's and Morley's famed experiment, and then the wheels well and truly came off the wagon!)

Welcome my good buddy Nick. Always a pleasure, I really enjoy our discussions.

I refer to several books on relativity which say from the observers perspective that states that to an observer, that to the OBSERVER, the object would indeed fall into the black hole, as the space time to them would be curved. But, if you think about it, the object falling into the black hole would feel like they never reach the centre. Therefore, for them, they would be stuck in a time frame in which they never enter the black hole. They would remain permanently outside the event horizon, as time slowed down to a very sluggish rate.

And it is the hole part of the name I have a problem with. It suggests the wrong
image.

Explain in greater detail please.