Speaking of nitpicking, the claim as made is false. We know that objects that defy the laws of physics don't exist, but that is a tautology, as the laws of physics encompass everything that exists. We also have a very strong prior that objects cannot exist which defy our current understanding of the laws of physics but we don't know with absolute certainty that our current laws of physics are exhaustive. (I mean, we know for a fact they are not, though not in ways that are relevant to the specific claim being discussed here.)We know that objects that defy what we know to be true about physics don't exist.
Even if the odds we are wrong about the laws of physics are incredibly low, I still find it to be hubris to be absolutely certain that objects cannot exist which defy our current understanding of physics. This pattern seems to repeat throughout the history of science.
And to be clear, I do not believe that a real physical object descended 80k feet in less than a second. I'm not arguing against our dismissal of that claim, I just don't think it is appropriate to have absolute certainty that our current understanding of physics cannot be supplemented, or even supplanted, in the future. Collectively that is a mistake that we have made many times.