Well. If “some woman” said it, it must be true.
Of course some of his success, much of his success, comes from being handsome, clever, charismatic, and very skilled at communication. He uses those gifts to communicate and popularize science. As a side effect, “some woman” thinks he’s Stephen Hawking. She’s an idiot, but that happens. It’s evidence that he is overrated by “some woman,” not generally.
My ass he isn’t. Again: charismatic, clever, and extremely well-spoken. He uses his platform to teach and spread the ideals of empiricism and critical thinking, and he does it very well.
Neither are Nobel candidates, true. Good thing neither presents himself as one.
ETA: to John Mace’s point, I absolutely agree that both men have political leanings…but they’ve hardly made a secret of it. And with something like, say, climate change, they are hardly responsible for the politicization of the science.