A possible counter-argument is that they're fake. Or it is real and there is a rational explanation for it.
Indeed. It's probably both.
Faking pictures is easy, and click bait sites make money from weird photos.
Everyone carries a phone that can take pictures; If they see something that looks a bit odd, they'll likely photograph it, and the way cameras on phones work can lead to odd effects when capturing moving objects (and SLR cameras can do odd things too).
Click-bait sites like those in your links are collecting real-but-coincidental; real-but-oddly effected by shutter movement and/or image processing; and fake-but-convincing pictures, and using the human tendency to notice oddness to amplify the WTF factor (one coincidence is strange, thirty are stranger still) but to ignore the aggregation of strangeness (this website is a collection of a few dozen weird photos, but to get these, a few billion photos were taken).
It's called "confirmation bias". We are excited by the few dozen photos that seem to support our hypothesis, while utterly disregarding the literally billions of photos that don't support it at all.
A one in a million coincidence, in a world of eight billion people, happens 8,000 times every single day. A few dozen photos of such coincidences are to be expected. I am a bit surprised that these are all (or the best) that click-bait sites can find.