All those assumptions based on a single earring. More madness.
Didn’t bother to read it, or do you lack comprehension?
The earring was found in a layer of ash that also contained bronze and iron arrowheads, Iron Age potsherds, and lamps. Lewis explained that the arrowheads were of Scythian origin. The Scythians, believed to be Eurasian nomads, were mercenary archers hired by the Babylonians. Such arrowheads have been found at other archaeological conflict sites in Israel and outside dating from the 7th and 6th centuries BCE.
“They were like the special forces since the Scythians were the best archers of the time,” Lewis said. “Also from this, we know that this was a scene of a Babylonian battle. We can say for certain that the archaeological context of the site was the taking of Jerusalem.“
Not one picture of the supposed earring - as usual.
From the article:
Dr. Lewis noted that in the field of archaeology, the Bible and science could coexist.
“The Bible is certainly one of our sources,” Dr. Lewis said. “You have to treat it respectfully. It represents something spiritual and was not written as a history book. It was written as a religious book but there is a historical base and root. But we cannot reject the Bible when studying archaeology. I would not rely on the Bible exclusively just like I would not rely on any other source exclusively. We need as many sources as possible and the Bible can be one of them.”
Intelligent common sense... He is a least honest enough to not try and claim this one find proves every word in the book as absolute fact. Which is the normal standard immediate “go to” with these finds.