No, the vast majority of speculation trys to argue an early date. I have seen this "evidence" and it is weak. Both Clement and Irenaeus document the later date and their observations are supplemented by Eusebius. Further, Romans historians never refer to Christians being exiled on Patmos prior to Domitian. Thus, the historical record of contemporary recordation supports only the late date theory.
You consider the obscure statement by Irenaeus “strong evidence”?
Somehow his other statement he made in the same writing where he writes about “ancient copies” of Revelation went overlooked by all the late daters.
BTW, do you have any idea how long it took back then to make even one copy? That would also make John in his 90s when he supposedly wrote it, or perhaps you think it was written by another John?
Sorry, but the late date argument is based on one obscure statement by Irenaeus that’s very weak as far as the external evidence and there’s no internal evidence to support the late date at all.
Sometimes I think the main reason people buy the late date argument and belief that the state of Israel is a sign of the “last days” is the desire to believe a rapture will occur in our lifetime. I mean who wouldn’t rather meet Christ in the air than having to take the subterranean route to meet Him. But finding truth should be our priority.