> these other excitations do have real observable effects
Yeah, that's the major thing: virtual particles explain observable effects in a sort-of intuitive way.
But you could (to my knowledge) get the exact same results without involving any virtual particles, via lattice gauge theory. Since you get the same observable results without them, virtual particles, IMO, shouldn't be considered fundamental to any effect, even if they make the explanation a lot easier.
Anything involving complicated interactions with relativity like Hawking-Unruh stuff has an even bigger issue since the notion of a particle/vacuum is observer dependent.
It is more clearly visualized in a perturbative expansion, for sure, but it's a bit disingenous I think to argue that there are no virtual particles in a lattice calculation.
I don't have the background to be confident about this, but aren't the predicates on which Hawking Radiation is based on part of the equivalency framework between sonic and "real" black holes?
If so, then while the observation of Hawking radiation in the model is certainly interesting, calling it an observation of Hawking radiation with regards to real black holes sounds like a stretch.