I have recently received a belated but for the first time a detailed and scientific review of my book - rated 3/4 (see my website - search Riaan Booysen - Exploring the Past, Thera ). The only negative criticism was that the book is a bit too academic in nature, but I never intended it to read like a novel. I'm sure members of forums like these do not object to reading academically inclined books.
I am often criticised that I based my conclusions on legends and myths that are pure fantasy. However, those who reject those legends never bother to come up with an explanation about how such legends could ever have come into existence, and how all could somehow paint the same picture. For instance, what was the origin of the legend the Jehova revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush? How do they explain the fact that Artapanus' description of Moses assisting his father during the burial ceremony of the first Apis bull is an almost verbatim description of Crown Prince Tuthmosis assisting his father Amenhotep III during the same burial ceremony? Are those academics who reject Osman's identification of Yuya as the biblical Joseph completely ignorant of the legend of Joseph and Asenath, which unequivocally links Joseph to Yuya and his daughter Tiye?
As a scientist my first inclination is always to trust science above anything else. However, regarding the dating of the eruption of Thera, I have since dug into the mathematics and discovered that there are some underlying assumptions in the process that would allow for a different time frame for the eruption. Somewhere something is amiss.
I pose some questions to academics and experts in ancient history on this forum on my website. The easiest way to refute any challenge to the conventional wisdom is, of course, to ignore it. However, I have no doubt that when you dig deeper, you'll find that these 'debunkers' do not have all the answers themselves.
You be the judge.