Interestingly, according to the parent's logic, there is a specific argument for that (took me a while to get the argument, and I think its not sound).
The reasoning is that, according to reliabilist responses to Gettier's problem, knowledge requires a reliable belief-forming process. But if we assume that LLMs operate probabilistically, they can't fulfill this, because they're "guessing".
The refutation to this argument is the usual one: levels of abstraction. LLM reasoning, like human intellect, can exhibit structured/logical behavior at a higher level of abstraction, even if the underlying processes are stochastic.
Therefore, if one bases the reasoning on the fact that both are stochastic at the lower level, then both can't produce knowledge, but if one bases it on the higher level, they both can.
(Having said that, I don't imply that AIs can reason like humans, but just that the criticism is not sound)