Not to pick on this guy, but this is ridiculous goal post shifting. It's just astounding what people will hand-wave away as not requiring intelligence.
An analogy with software is that math competitions are like (very hard) leetcode.
There was an article posted on HN recently that is related: https://benexdict.io/p/math-team
The analogy is as follows. Like with with leetcode & job interviews is as follows, to excel at math competitions one must grind problems and learn tricks, in order to quickly solve problems in a high pressure environment. And, just like how solving leetcode problems is pretty different than what a typical computer scientist or software engineer does, doing math competitions is pretty different than what a typical mathematician does.
We test developer skill by giving them leetcode problems, but leetcode while requiring programming skill is nothing like a real programmer's job.
It isn't untrue, but both are considered metrics by the community. (Whether rightfully or not seems irrelevant to ML).
I think the ultimate goal though is clearly that AI systems will be able to generate new high-value knowledge and proofs. I think the realistically the final goal post has always been at that point.
Also if you read about the structure of AlphaGeometry, I think it's very hard to maintain that it "requires intelligence." As AI stuff goes, it's pretty comprehensible and plain.