I might have been more "open minded"about this story except for the following items:

"Scientists / Historians - reluctant to accept any evidence which alters their current, widely accepted human timeline."

This is the usual crap about scientists being so eager to close their eyes and bury their heads in the sand if a new finding threatens their orthodoxy. This is the same slander always trotted out by someone who wants to sell you a bill of goods. Scientists love to find things that violate the current orthodoxy, it's how they get rich and famous. What they don't do is throw theories out the window that have given good, consistent results for a long time unless 1) they are absolutely certain and 2) the new theory also manages to explain why the old theory worked as well as it did for as long as it did.

The second item is the book being plugged at the end of the story. This guy makes a career out of yellow archaeology, and all his books sound pretty much the same. Even if one of them were true, they can't possibly all be true. I read the one about the Egyptian pyramids and the Sphinx because it is astronomically based, and it was full of crapola.