That feels an awkward way to word that claim, since both of those outcomes have mathematically zero chance of being true literally (interpreted as points), or l

That feels an awkward way to word that claim, since both of those outcomes have mathematically zero chance of being true literally (interpreted as points), or less than 5% total chance of being true (interpreted as areas) I think the converse statement would have been more strictly true statistically (e.g. that 0.45 is statistically consistent with the data), and more accurately descriptive of what a p-test actually means.