No it isn't. He did the same thing as taking bunch of numbers dividing them by one and saying, "see nothing happened". You guys forget that there is a market for bitcoin beyond only those who mine. Miners control difficulty first and then price and non-miners control price first and then difficulty.
I guess you missed the point. I created the exact situation that is happening in reality. (Also, I don't remember dividing anything by one.)
That magical being is called Moore's law, and its current nickname is ASIC.
Look what happened in the period when difficulty went from 0.6 million to 2.3 million: price fell from $1200 to $800. Should we conclude that increasing difficulty actually causes the price to fall?
Or should we say that the situation that the miners' costs of creating one bitcoin are 10% of one bitcoin, so difficulty should go up? It will go up because new mining hardware will be created and turned on. When the price fell from 1200 to 800, it just means cost went up from 10 to 15%, so, still more hardware can be, and will be, added.
I can safely predict that difficulty will continue to rise until the mining cost (running costs) get to 50%, and at that point it can still rise, but not much.
So, you say that difficulty causes price. We know that in the next 10 days difficulty will go up, perhaps 30%. Based on this, and your model, where will the price go?