David Rohl himself claims that I did not say one scholar looked at it As to what the rest who looked at it thought it is not reported that they called it rubbish well then why the hell is the only academic we can cite on the matter the very man who called it rubbish It is not reportedthat they called it rubbish is a non starter Do you or do you not have scholarly reviews of this thing that reflect more favourably on it than Kitchen If you do why do you not point us to them already I do not know if there are favourable reviews but your consistent refusal to produce any make me very suspicious that there may not in fact be any