Again: IT ISN'T THE SATOSHI KEY, the fingerprint does not match. Why is this so hard for you to understand.
Either you've forgotten the context or this is just your typical loud misdirection. This wasn't a Satoshi claim. It was a claim made to the ATO in 2014 or 2015 that a trust was created in 2011, apparently with the aim of showing CSW did not have direct access to the 1,100,000 BTC stash.
His having or not having direct control over those coins was a matter of tax liability under Australia's ToFA law, applicable to people with $100 million in certain kinds of assets (including bitcoins). The claim of backdating of PGP keys was relevant because it would invalidate his claim and leave him with no way to prove he doesn't owe the tax, since he could have just faked the signature later.
So no, that is not relevant, but nice try at throwing the audience off the scent. I you, a supposed cryptography expert, failed to realize that you can edit PGP metadata and that this was advisable due to SHA1 issues discovered, it may cause your followers to question what else you might be completely wrong about but manage to sound authoritative and have no other Core devs question you for a whole year on.
what paper? I made a casual reddit post! wtf.
Casual? Sounds like you're laying the groundwork to back out of your claim.