If there was a 'well respected archaeologists' they would address all the evidences, and debunk them. And I haven't yet seen one to do this.

Here's what you'll typically see, they may address a few bits of evidences, but ignore the rest, and they begin ad hominem attacks / name calling.

As stated, this would be like a judge, only weighing in a few pieces of evidences, and ignoring the countless other presented evidences.

Also, there's many Christians, who do believe Ron. Do you automatically assume, that none of these are Bible scholars?

I do see your point. I say, if there's a lack of evidence, be willing to admit, there's insufficient evidence, versus prematurely accepting, or rejecting the claims.

By doing this, one can then, continue to seek more evidence to prove or disprove claims.