The lighter shadow is still smaller than the object, (it's a bit less defined, but I see it as 120mm maximum) just not as small as the umbral shadow.
The lighter shadow starts around the 8 mm and ends off the photo, which would make it at 130 mm, which is larger or the same size as the object, thus this photo does not prove your cause
It starts around 8 cm and ends around 20 cm, which would make it about 120 mm, which is smaller than the original object.
Besides, your initial objection was to the 70 mile shadow of the moon, which is the umbra. Rab gave you an example of an umbra that is smaller than the object casting it, using only sunlight, exactly as you requested. Deciding suddenly that you want to examine the penumbra is, as others have pointed out, moving the goal posts.
You asked for proof of something you thought was impossible. It was given to you. Admit you were wrong gracefully and come away smarter than when you started. You're just making yourself look like a bigger ass arguing for a point that has been photographically proven to be incorrect.