I think that's a pretty serious accusation to make about historians and archaeologists in general, in the context of a discussion of someone who hasn't added to

I think that's a pretty serious accusation to make about historians and archaeologists in general, in the context of a discussion of someone who hasn't added to the field, and indeed produces pseudoscientific crap for Netflix. He may try to stay consistent with the evidence as he understands it in which case it becomes clear he doesn't understand it. So no, I don't find it inspirational or evocative, any more than I have found talks by psychics, ufologists or homeopaths evocative. They all imagine their beliefs are evidenced...