I didn't need the cache or archive.org yesterday. It was up as a normal page. The only reason we need to use it now is because Mark took it down. Google last cached the site on March 16th. That can't be faked and means the site was up then. Mark may have taken it down in January, but he clearly decided to put it back up while he transitioned into his next scheme.
There is still plenty of reason to question the data as something doesn't look right with it, like I said maybe something messed up with forwarding or DNS/cache, enough to at LEAST ask "hmmm what could be causing this, maybe I'll ask Mark for an official response before I write another hatchet piece of an article"...just sayin
Either way, forget about obsessing about that & lets concentrate on the implications.
IF someone invested based on that page WITHOUT realising they were projections then that would be an issue.
Why?
Because all private investors HAVE to speak to him to invest, and it would have to be made clear they are projections.
So, I suggest you find out IF
1) The page in question convinced someone to invest thinking it was anything other than "projections" (Not that any "reasonable" person would)
2) If 1 occurred and then they invested privately and were NOT told they were projections.
If both 1 & 2 have occurred, then you can carry on, if not, just leave it alone.
For me your purile "graphics" headers for each of your articles, in particular your latest article, speaks a thousand words wrt your bias.