Yes, he has when Nadal was still a baby but never in his prime. On the other hand, Murray has beaten him twice in his prime in two different slams. That's more noteworthy.
But seriously, a truly mature person not to mention, a true and genuine fan of Federer wouldn't go to some other player's forum and post all sorts of rubbish about his idol and put the other player's achievements down in front of their very fans. You are either the dumbest person to have ever lived on this planet not to understand this simple concept after being told like a 100 times - or your head is so far up SmugFed's arse that you are unable to see or understand anything else. Your pick.
It is all very well saying that Nadal was a baby when Roger beat him but he was well established as the world number 2! So baby or not beating the world number 2 in a grand slam final obviously is a far bigger achievement than say AO 10 where Murray benefitted from an injured Nadal withdrawing injured and it wasn't even the final!
As I have said before this is a tennis forum and Roger happens to be the greatest tennis player of all time, discussing a tennis player (the greatest ever) on a tennis forum seems reasonable enough to me.