Stephen Hawking has died at the age of 76.

[Angrboda]

Professor Hawking developed a cosmological model which eliminated the need for a creator or creation event.   Your opinion is based on ignorance of his work.

I don't think that what you said follows (at least about a creator).   But if he was or you would like to make a positive case for atheism; then present your reasons. 

You could have abbreviated that to "I don't think," and you would have been entirely correct.  But by all means, continue to dig yourself deeper.   In the Hartle-Hawking model of cosmology, there is no beginning of the universe, and thus no need for any creator or creation event.  That's not a deep philosophical point.  Your complaint was essentially that Hawking didn't have reasons from within his field of expertise upon which to base his position on God, and you have been shown to be wrong on the point under consideration.  I do not need to present any positive case for atheism to demonstrate that your comments about Hawking's atheism were motivated by ignorance.  

In Sean Carol's debate with Craig however;  he mentioned a number of models,  none of which he thought was necessarily correct though.  I don't remember if Hawkings model was presented within these by Carol, but I don't' think that it is a slam dunk.   There is a lot of evidence which supports a hot big bang model, and many scientist still think that the universe is ~14 billion years old.

I never said nor implied that the Hartle-Hawking model of cosmology was a "slam dunk."  The truth or validity of his model was not the point under debate here.  Your attempt to substitute it for the point under contention is at best an irrelevant obfuscation, and at worst an example of you moving the goalposts  (and given that above you've made the correctness of my prior point contingent upon me providing a "positive case for atheism," then I think I am fully justified in accusing you of the latter).