Another bit of dishonesty I note on the part of the person who is making ad hominem attacks on my sources without actually debating them is the fact that they are only acknowledging two of the sources of documentation I provided, rather than all four of them.

For instance, one of the two Haaretz articles I provided links to provides quite a bit of official documentation in support of what Shlomo Sand says in his book. The reviewer's main complaint about Sands' book is that it is suggesting that what he is saying about the history of the Jews is not already common knowledge among academics. This reviewer shows that the academic community has long known what Sands is proposing to present to readers for the first time. And the reviewer provides examples with sources to back up his claims.

The other article I posted that this person appears to be trying to pretend I never posted provides a lot of archaeological evidence that comes from reputable Israeli archaeologists.

The fact that this person would think people can be fooled by these kinds of tactics is pretty astonishing, but certainly says a lot about their mindset and overall world view (ie: seriously deluded and extremely dishonest).