Goodness, no.

What seems to be the basic point is a good one. When Nebuchadnezzar says something along the lines of "the fourth looks like the son of god", a kind of knee-jerk reaction of some Christians is to conclude that Nebuchadnezzar saw Jesus. But N. was not speaking from anything like a Jewish/Christian viewpoint. So: no.

But the details of that comment are a bit lacking.

Nebacunezzar (sp.) was a pagan man, so he worshiped the pagan gods, which demons were connected to, meaning that the "son of the gods" he was familiar with were demons.

One might conclude this based on some Christian ideas about demons. But I would not call it a scholarly conclusion.

The Bible also never says that angels change appearance when they fall. In fact, it says the opposite. Fallen angels do not change appearance according to the Bible (will find a citation).

The reason there is no citation is that the Bible says next to nothing about "fallen angels". If we take the Bible as a coherent, consistent whole -- which would not be the majority viewpoint on this sub -- then we do have 2 Corinthians 11:14: "Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light." But then nowhere is it stated in the Bible that Satan is a fallen angel.

So to conclude, as the comment you reference does, that:

[Nebuchadnezzar] recognized the angel of the Lord as a son of the gods, as angels an demons look very similar if not identical.

We would have to decide that (1) Satan is an example of a fallen angel, (2) 2 Corinthians 11:14 describes the standard consistent appearance of the fallen angels and/or demons, (3) the "gods" Nebuchadnezzar worshiped were actually demons, and (4) these gods had actually appeared to Nebuchadnezzar.

That's quite a stretch -- particularly #4. You won't find very many scholars willing to argue that way.