Noticed a few signs, he refers to other scholars who have found evidence of xyz, and bases his assumptions on those but doesn't name any of them. Very suspect. He has a book or 2 out, so I referenced from that also, and figure I know why.
There are a few reasons for this, one is that they are often biased polemicists whose entire aim is to punt their own religion. Some have even recounted their previous assertions after being challenged. But 3 other authors have based their assumptions on the recanted claims. This guy is now using these 3 other authors as his proof.
I don't think he's being malicious per se, just a bit naive. He just seems like he's a Nabataean romantic, and wants to attach more relevance to their existence than there actually is. By talking up Petra, he's convinced himself of that.
And a lot of the anti Islamic websites have picked this up , and piled a lot more BS on top of what was already there, making it further difficult to actually find source material online
Everyone and his dog has a theory about something. This is the internet. And people like Jay Smith , who have already displayed their prejudices will jump on anything that supports their views without much of a fact check.
I think what is telling is when people of one religion are seemingly obsessed with another religion. Almost like they want to rack up some conversion points to get to heaven. That goes for the guy who started that thread as well