Ask that question seriously Khandro and you'll get a serious answer.
Still, I'll pre-empt you. Stephen Hawking is not wrong, but what he says really -- really, really, really!!! -- needs to be put in its proper context, and taken out of it, as you have just done (unwittingly, I am sure), makes serious and important scientific work sound like a prediction of Doomsday that cannot possibly be taken seriously.
So let me explain what Hawking's talking about, why he is right, and why he is also very, very misleading -- and why you've therefore been horribly misled into thinking that there is somehow a serious danger.
This is only going to be a brief overview because -- again, I cannot stress this enough -- the quote only makes sense in the context of physical equations I can't explain here, if nothing else because AB doesn't support the relevant format. However, the basic point is that:
1. There is a parameter in the Standard Model that describes the coupling of four Higgs bosons to each other.
2. The value of this parameter changes with energy scale.
3. This parameter can even become negative in certain cases (when it "starts out" being positive).
4. If that happens, then the effective mass of the Higgs Boson can spontaneously go from 125 GeV to something many, many times greater. (This is a version of quantum tunnelling.)
5. If *that* happens, then the mass of everything in the Universe also jumps to the same scale, and basically everything blows up (or at any rate atoms can no longer remain stable, etc etc).
6. This last thing is what Hawking etc is referring to, and it's a real effect. No quibble from me there.
7. However, this effect is very sensitive to two quantities that aren't known precisely, namely the mass of the Higgs boson and also the mass of the top quark.
8. For current values, the parameter does indeed flip negative but in such an extreme way that, if true, the "half-life" of this type of Universe collapse is something approaching many times larger than the lifetime of the Universe. Billions of years away, anyhow.
9. But as I say that's couched in uncertainties about the masses of the main particles involved -- a couple of % out either way on the top mass, for instance, and either things happen faster or not at all.
10. It's *also* possibly affected by "new Physics" that we haven't discovered yet, rendering the entire argument above bogus anyway.
Conclusion: Yes, the LHC *could* cause the planet to explode, but only in such extreme and unlikely circumstances that it's not worth worrying one iota about.
Second conclusion: you still have no idea what you are talking about.