Thus the Exodus evidence becomes somewhat supportive to the Noaic flood and vise versa; the flood somewhat supportive to the Exodus.
Can you see that you are building a house of cards, here?
How can you two unsupported assertions be used to support each other?
King Arthur was real becuase of the Lady in the Lake and she is real because of King Arthur.
You really need to examine your thought procecess here, Buz.
Edited by Admin, : Hide good point made by a non-participant.