Talk:Homunculus Nebula

Michael Hanlon

Reference 2, to "Michael Hanlon, 2009", is phenomenally uninformative. Furthermore, the fine-tuning of the theory being discussed smacks of either amateur or pie-in-the-sky theorizing. In either case a proper citation would be necessary to evaluate the claim being advanced. Unless a citation can be found, those sentences should be dismissed as original research. 174.99.75.97 (talk) 04:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, a cursory google search locates a Michael Hanlon posting comments to a lot of places with pseudo-science see as an example: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/dark-star-diaries/2014/10/23/the-black-hole-in-interstellar-looks-amazingly-realistic/

I propose deletion of this unless a credible source is found asap.

89.168.222.38 (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My crackpot-meter broke down after reading Mr Hanson's comments here, does anyone know where I can obtain a new one?: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-stephen-hawking-really-meant-when-he-said-there-are-no-black-holes/ 89.168.222.38 (talk) 20:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]