I feel like the author of the article completely misapprehended what Hawking meant. We give Einstein credit because his theories met the benchmarks of predictio

I feel like the author of the article completely misapprehended what Hawking meant. We give Einstein credit because his theories met the benchmarks of prediction and testability. For example General Relativity made a prediction about the orbit of Mercury that gave a more precise answer then Isaac Newton. The issue with Hawking (based on my understanding as an enthusiastic novice) is that Hawking Radiation can't be measured because it would be necessary to find Black Holes that are significantly less than 1 Solar Mass, and such things don't exist in our Universe as far as we know. And this in turn is why Hawking Radiation can't be tested. But, it's also true that Einstein never won a Nobel for SR or GR.