Not necessarily. Justice Scalia said "the meaning of natural born within the Constitution...requires jus soli." He did not say anything further which would lead one to conclude that he believes ONLY those who obtained their citizenship by jus soli are natural-born, which is what you are saying.
Maybe reposting an oldie but goodie from two years ago might help, not you specifically but others who are silently reading along and scratching their heads at the internal inconsistencies of your argumentation:
I'm still waiting on those "US legal precedents that occurred prior to Ratification under the Articles of Confederation" that you mentioned earlier. Your "oldie but [a] goodie" isn't one of them, now is it?
You presume to be in some position to make demands. You’re actually not in any such position, for the reasons stated upthread. If you were actually interested in learning anything, rather than regurgitating by rote, I might reconsider. I’ve seen no evidence thus far that you are, however, so bite me, if you’ll pardon the colloquialism.