As far as I can tell, that would pretty much depend on how you define evidence. I consider any observation that supports a claim to be evidence, and I think by that definition it certainly qualified as compelling evidence.
And I don’t necessarily agree with the way you portrayed it as a mechanical model. I would say it’s an observable experiment that infers quite impressively that what is going on at the quantum realm is indeed represented in the experiment considering all the similarities. But I don’t know if this in particular would matter that much to whether or not my point is valid.
And as I understand it, spacetime is not a Newtonian concept. My point would be to also go back to gravity as a force, not a spacetime continuum.