Yes I have read the article. The point of which is to confuse the reader with irrelevances, IMO. The reason for the theory is simple and practical: to explain the absence of paradoxes in time travel. But the "confusers" can't say that.
I don't see how ANY of that relates to so called "Mandela...
First of, "the past" is not necessarily the past: let say in our "reality" one did not change the past, so it would be a different reality. On top of that, even if someone could change the timeline, that change would STILL start a new timeline.
I am not into these things, at all. There can be quite a few explanations for the effect, and even more than one cause. The "simplest" one has nothing to do with any "shifts", but simply a manifestation of a massive use of mind control.