For those who want proof of the exodus

[Drich]

It does not matter if you have them or not.  One cannot simply ( and arbitrarily!) move history by 300 years for the sole purpose of attempting to rescue one farcical bible tale without upsetting the entire history of the region. 

Apparently it does matter because the graphs and charts explain that their is a 300+ year gap in all of ancient history that centers around the dark age created between the middle and the 3rd dynasty of egypt. by removing this 300 year gap it moves everything before this darkage forward, and does nothing to the time after this gap. This puts 6 or 7 other ancient cultures back on a fluid track, other wise the current explanation is that egypt's dark age put the rest of the ancient world in a similar darkage is almost nonsensical.

Example.  You cannot move the reign of Ramesses II up by 300 years without also moving the Hittite Empire up by the same 300 years since they fought each other at Kadesh and identical copies of the peace treaty have been found in Egypt and Hatusa.  But the Hittite Empire ceased to exist as a result of the depredations of the Sea People c 1190 BC and this is securely dated by non Egyptian or biblical means.  Rohl does not give a flying fuck about that because all he is trying to do is give fools like you a reason to cling to your absurd exodus tale.  He is a charlatan and has been denounced as a charlatan for a generation already.

Again No! Closing the gap on the 2nd egyptian dark age from 400 to 100 years (a time where nothing was recorded/is lost historically so we can't possibly know exactly how long this age lasted) Does NOT affect the time of ramses and the third kingdom.
WHAT THE MOVIE YOU OLD GOAT! You sound like a moron and don't even know it! You keep bring up the same points and are either ignoring what I/the movie says or are too thick to understand the time shift the movie talks about happens before the third dynasty which is when Ramses lived!

The fundies object to Rohl because his revised chronology trashes the part of the story which has "Solomon" building a temple in the 10th century "480 years after the Israelites came out of Egypt."  The problem there is that if you add 480 to 970 you get 1450 BC and that is the reign of Thutmoses III who just happens to have been the greatest pharaoh of the time and the man who built ( not lost ) the maximum extent of the Egyptian empire of the New Kingdom. 

The movie is shit.  And so is your fucking bible.

Again, Rohl's book is not center stage here, and the time line shift the movie explains does NOTHING to the time soloman's temple was built nor thutmoses or anyone else old sport.

Again your arguement is moot, because you are argueing Rohl's book. The movie is not on Rohl's book, the movie only takes the time line shift IDEA and applies it to a different 'time'/type of shift. Rohl's 'book' only inspired this NEW look at the time line. WATCH THE MOVIE! Take notes then maybe we can have a topical discussion.