I dropped Disney Plus

McGregor was 34 in RotS (2005) and Guinness was 63 in ANH (1977). So that's a difference of 29 years for the two actors. There is a roughly 18-19 year gap between the character in the two films (Luke being a baby in RotS and around 18 or 19 when ANH begins). So, McGregor is only off by about 10 years (29-19=10). I've seen worse continuity in other films, so it isn't THAT bad. This seem less plausible than what we are being asked to accept between RotS and ANH., where Obi-Wan supposedly ages ten years on film but the actor only ages 3 years in real life. Plus, McGregor was 28 in TMP, which is rather old for a padawan who's been training since early childhood, it would seem to me. As for ANH versus this series, McGregor ages 17 years but the character only ages 10. We don't have Guinness playing Obi-Wan at this age for a comparison, however, but McGregor really should be 7 years younger if it takes place 10 years after RotS.

Is this a space fantasy or a bio pic? lol
Nobody cares.

I thought the same thing too.

And people tend ask a similar question about the X-Men: First Class / X-Men: Dark Phoenix cast all the way to the ones of the original X-Men trilogy.

Obi-Wan 10 years after Revenge of the Sith looks pretty close to how he did when the Republic fell, however we are supposed to believe another 9 years later and Obi-Wan will have aged dramatically to fit his A New Hope appearance, meanwhile Bail Organa keeps looking much as he did in Revenge of the Sith.

Surely Obi wan will be so traumatized by getting beat up by Stronk Waman Inqusitor, his hair will turn white over night.