You still don't understand wikipedia editorial obligations, citing this for the view that there is a scientific consensus. That phrasing nowhere appears on page 383, and the author Frundakis speaks of appears hypothesis, etc. as is proper in provisory results of a scientific study. Please supply the RS that support your assertion (2( supply an RS that supports your otherwise WP:OR assertion that '22 out of 23 genetic studies confirms this fact.' Neither your personal beliefs or professional background are proof of anything. The only thing that counts is RS that back up one's assertions, and, as in this case, you consistently fail to provide them, as opposed to providing your personal opinions about the consensus you see in those sources. (3)What's al-Husseini got to do with this. I wrote a large part of the article, and it is closely watched by highly informed experts on the period who only use, like myself, RS. I, and they, only remove whatever cannot be substantiated by academic RS. Repeating hysterical innuendo and rumours is not material to the specific objections both I and Zero and a few others have raised. Please review wiki policy on WP:OR and WP:RS, and get back with the information asked of you.