Considering that the supposed aristocrats who did the inventing wold have been under threat of execution for doing so in First Century Rome it's a bit difficult to imagine what their motive might have been, or why if so very clever they'd have written out any confession that would have been evidence to have them destroyed.
While I'm no expert, that author makes the claim that this was some sort of psychological warfare. To me this doesn't seem to be in keeping with the Roman approach to subjugating foreign populations, while what they did in A.D. 70 is much more in keeping with their policies. (Recall that they didn't attempt to alter the thinking of the
Carthaginians, they exterminated them and sowed their fields with salt.)
Also, we should remember that things like "psychological warfare" are modern concepts, and were probably alien to the thinking of a people who assumed that other races and ethnicities were locked into (almost always irrational and defective) modes of thought.
Without quoting the article extensively, I also notice that the authors assumptions are based largely in the similarity between the New Testament and Josephus accounts of the progress of the then Roman general Titus Flavius. As I recall, there has long ample reason to call the character and veracity of Josephus into question. It seems me that the Author's case could be at least as readily used to suppose that Josephus altered the newly circulated accounts of a Jewish Messiah to flesh out his accounts of Titus Flavius. We should remember that at the time, Roman emperors such as Titus became were held to be divine.
And one should point out that the article title suggests some discovery of some ancient text with an explicit admission, and in one sentences states that one had been "uncovered," but makes no further reference to a confession.
