And the submarine clearly can swim! :D
The model encompasses 3D information, but a model is not a thinking entity able to understand anything. Well, it might be argued that saying that the "model understands" is a metaphor, and used as such OK, fine. But that’s it. Analogies rarely scale well.
As for humans, have you ever heard of proprioception? If that is not "native 3D sensors", I have no idea of what a 3D sense might be.
A machine with 3d understanding from 2d samples predates computers
I think that would be an oversimplification. We do have some 3D information from focus and eye convergence.
If we elevate "correlations" to mean "understanding", we're quickly going to run out of words.
At some point we have to accept that when you layer simple ops on top of simple ops enough times you get complex behavior.
Humans don't get natively 3D training data either. We don't have depth sensors or any other natively 3D senses. Our eyes only ever see 2D images and we learn 3D structure from that, so I guess these 2D image models are doing something analagous. Except they don't even have the benefit of stereo images!