Yup, and I gave a comical argument for why it doesn't. But the evidence weighs heavily on one side, and your comment re "current accuracy" of the photo is in alignment. (I've never met this man.)
But a newspaper wouldn't "prove" anything in our AI world, either. The man has gone to great lengths to present his case, with relatively little credible presented against it. Skepticism is always warranted online, but when skepticism bends into conspiracy-thinking and ever-kookier explanations, the simpler explanation is more often right. Occam's Razor.
The hullaballoo this provider evokes is too much.