> >Perhaps instead of pontificating, you should actually go READ THE
> >BOOK and get a clue about the evidence that is actually presented
> >therein.
>
> As you haven't read anything that would be called status quo you have no
> way of judging anything about Rohl.
Ian, you have no idea what I have or haven't read unless you can
claim omniscience and can read my mind. Chances are I've read
as much as you have. In fact, since you haven't read Rohl, I've
actually read one more. Please stop assuming you know what I
have or have not read, because you're not qualified to judge. You
seem to assume that if someone doesn't accept the status quo,
they must not have read it. Just one more in a long string of
uninformed presumptions.