Article is a rant. Author is uneducated. Using Asimov as example of "unscientific" science fiction is hilarious, even if the author bothered to look through Asi

Article is a rant. Author is uneducated. Using Asimov as example of "unscientific" science fiction is hilarious, even if the author bothered to look through Asimov's auto-biography and found "The Guide to Science" in multiple versions in there. Same goes for Neal Stephenson, etc. Science Fiction is based on science. A lot of the "prediction" have come to pass.