Stephen Hawking is a genius, when it comes to scamming people

You have to admire genius. The global warming crowd has been getting rich predicting that the world will end in the distant future in a dramatic fashion. We can never prove them wrong because their predictions are slated to occur far in the future.

But before global warming hoaxes, there was Stephen Hawking. Hawking got rich initially not by predicting the future but laying out a story of the distant past. He wrote a best selling book, "A Brief History of Time," describing how the universe was created. Now, Stephen Hawking has absolutely no idea how the universe was created. He can't. He wasn't there. So he made up a story about it and everyone calls him a genius. He's a genius because his theory about the creation of the universe can never be disproved. Now that's smart--writing "scientifically" about a subject where your "research" can never, ever be crosschecked.

Having milked the past for all its worth, Hawking wants to cash in on future predictions, which also can never be verified. At first he said that the world will end in 1,000 years, a nice, distant time-- and isn't it amazing how the end of the world will come in such a round number?

That was November. But now Hawking is back saying that the world will end in 100 years. I think he realized that people were not paying attention to him because 1,000 years was too far into the future. 100 years, though distant, is more immediate and demands more attention!

Naturally no one in the media is questioning how this "genius" thought the world would end in 1,000 years a few months ago and now thinks it's only 100 years--does that mean he was wildly wrong just six months ago? But like Trump supporters, his legion of followers are only focused on what he's saying today.

“With climate change, overdue asteroid strikes, epidemics and population growth, our own planet is increasingly precarious.”

Really? How many people have been killed by "asteroid strikes"? I think that number must be zero. Oh wait, it's not "asteroid strikes" but "overdue asteroid strikes." Hawking is impatient for a kind of disaster which hasn't even happened yet!

As for population growth, why is that a problem? Is it a food issue? If we use one or two percent of the Earth for food production, and Earth's population doubles, we could simply double the number of farms or more likely increase productivity.

During the hour-long speech, Hawking told the audience that Earth's cataclysmic end may be hastened by humankind, which will continue to devour the planet’s resources at unsustainable rates, the Express reported.

What resources would those be? As mentioned above food is not a problem. Does he mean energy resources? We have enough oil, gas, and coal to last hundreds of years.

Some of Hawking's most explicit warnings have revolved around the potential threat posed by artificial intelligence. 

So, if the asteroid doesn't get us, and we don't run out of gas, it's killer robots we have to worry about.


Really, couldn't Hawking have come up with something better? It's obvious the man is desperate for attention. People aren't interested in fictional stories about the beginning of the universe; they are hungry for stories about its ending. The global warming people have stolen his thunder! The fact that Hawking can't come up with anything better than asteroids and killer robots shows us that even when it comes to writing fiction, this man isn't the "genius" we are told that he is. Unless he comes up with something better, I'm afraid he'll go down in history as little more than a pale white version of Neil Degrasse Tyson.

Ed Straker is the senior writer at NewsMachete.com.

You have to admire genius. The global warming crowd has been getting rich predicting that the world will end in the distant future in a dramatic fashion. We can never prove them wrong because their predictions are slated to occur far in the future.

But before global warming hoaxes, there was Stephen Hawking. Hawking got rich initially not by predicting the future but laying out a story of the distant past. He wrote a best selling book, "A Brief History of Time," describing how the universe was created. Now, Stephen Hawking has absolutely no idea how the universe was created. He can't. He wasn't there. So he made up a story about it and everyone calls him a genius. He's a genius because his theory about the creation of the universe can never be disproved. Now that's smart--writing "scientifically" about a subject where your "research" can never, ever be crosschecked.

Having milked the past for all its worth, Hawking wants to cash in on future predictions, which also can never be verified. At first he said that the world will end in 1,000 years, a nice, distant time-- and isn't it amazing how the end of the world will come in such a round number?

That was November. But now Hawking is back saying that the world will end in 100 years. I think he realized that people were not paying attention to him because 1,000 years was too far into the future. 100 years, though distant, is more immediate and demands more attention!

Naturally no one in the media is questioning how this "genius" thought the world would end in 1,000 years a few months ago and now thinks it's only 100 years--does that mean he was wildly wrong just six months ago? But like Trump supporters, his legion of followers are only focused on what he's saying today.

“With climate change, overdue asteroid strikes, epidemics and population growth, our own planet is increasingly precarious.”

Really? How many people have been killed by "asteroid strikes"? I think that number must be zero. Oh wait, it's not "asteroid strikes" but "overdue asteroid strikes." Hawking is impatient for a kind of disaster which hasn't even happened yet!

As for population growth, why is that a problem? Is it a food issue? If we use one or two percent of the Earth for food production, and Earth's population doubles, we could simply double the number of farms or more likely increase productivity.

During the hour-long speech, Hawking told the audience that Earth's cataclysmic end may be hastened by humankind, which will continue to devour the planet’s resources at unsustainable rates, the Express reported.

What resources would those be? As mentioned above food is not a problem. Does he mean energy resources? We have enough oil, gas, and coal to last hundreds of years.

Some of Hawking's most explicit warnings have revolved around the potential threat posed by artificial intelligence. 

So, if the asteroid doesn't get us, and we don't run out of gas, it's killer robots we have to worry about.


Really, couldn't Hawking have come up with something better? It's obvious the man is desperate for attention. People aren't interested in fictional stories about the beginning of the universe; they are hungry for stories about its ending. The global warming people have stolen his thunder! The fact that Hawking can't come up with anything better than asteroids and killer robots shows us that even when it comes to writing fiction, this man isn't the "genius" we are told that he is. Unless he comes up with something better, I'm afraid he'll go down in history as little more than a pale white version of Neil Degrasse Tyson.

Ed Straker is the senior writer at NewsMachete.com.

RECENT VIDEOS