Apparently you are unable to understand why your quote is not relevant. FIrslty we are discussing the evidence IN EGYPT so unless your quote is evidence of a significant number of "lost: settlements in Egypt it has no value ot the current discussion..
If none of the settlements are in Egypt they are not direct evidence of "lost" settlements in Egypt. Since it apparently does not mention the major Egyptian cities which WOULD have been identified in 1937 we can conclude that it does not include any sites in Egypt proper.
If the reason the settlements were unidentified in 1937 does not apply to the current state of our knowledge of Egypt then it is not indirect evidence either. The fact that ALL 19 settlements identified were in Israel or Judah and that they included small villages indicates that the identification is a function of the amount of archaelogicial investigation. Since the degree of investigation of Egypt would be comparable to that of Israel and Judah even at the time - and more evidence would have been gathered since - the data cannot be reasonably extrapolated to apply to Egypt.
Therefore the quote is neither direct nor indirect evidence of "lost" settlements in Egypt.
As for your final comment, are you are arguing then that there is nothing that could distinguish sites occupied by pre-Exodus Israelites from sites occupied by Canaanites of the same period ?