He never said that. Your judgement becomes quite clouded when it comes to Nadal. He said that Ferrer has had better results than Nadal.
Well, it was his response/argument to me saying rankings don't show who's the better player, just who had the most points over the past 12 months. Would be strange to write an essay like that if he didn't disagree with my statement.
Although if that wasn't your point, please tell me otherwise, Litotes.
One's opinion about who is currently playing at the best level is a lot more subjective than who has had better results. When a player takes a seven month break from tennis, it is not too absurd that another player who played consistently well(although without those 'big' results) is ranked above this player for a while, especially in a ranking system that treats every week in the last 52 to be exactly the same.
Remember when Del Potro came back from injury and was ranked way below 50? It is not that the people above were 'better' players, but they had had better results. It is exactly the same thing here.
Before Nadal's injury, Nadal and Djokovic contested 4 consecutive slam finals, splitting the last 9 slams between them. After that Djokovic dropped off a tiny bit, but still reached the USO final and later restored order by winning the WTF and AO. Since Nadal's comeback, Rafa is yet to miss a final in his first 5 tournaments, winning 3 already, potentially 4 after today. We are back to seeing Nadal-Djokovic finals. When fit and playing, they dominate. It's that simple.
Federer's last tournament win was 8 months ago and Murray is still a clay clown, but has a case to be called better than Nadal at the moment. Federer? Absolutely not.