Yes, of course. But that is not how correlation is usually expressed. And it also doesn't explain what it means. It just sounds like philosophers doing some hand waving.

What can it mean to have an effect propagating into the past? Surely our usual definition of time is simply a series of events. If so then it always points in one direction for the entity sitting at the leading edge, the current event is always succeeded by the next event.

All I have to go on is the article, perhaps the source material makes more sense.