The current timeline of dynastic Egyptian and Sumerian history is impossible. Believing in it means endorsing the idea the Hyksos were time-travelers, and that the Egyptians were technologically a thousand years behind their major trading partners in Mesopotamia during the Middle Kingdom. It also is not what the ancient Egyptians or Sumerian actually recorded, so believing it means believing that modern Egyptologists and Assyriologists know more about ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia than the ancient Egyptians and Sumerians themselves. Given that the ancient Egyptians and Sumerians lived through it, and all Egyptologists have to go on is random bits of pottery and mostly ruined buildings, this seems like an incredible stretch of the imagination, granted no more than time-traveling Hyksos, but still a stretch. The fact that Egyptologists feel they don't need to explain these anachronisms because the history of Egypt is a political timeline, not subject to science, is insulting both to the intelligence and to the integrity of anyone that bothers looking into the history of thee preeminent ancient cultures.The idea that the ancient Egyptians built docks in the middle of the desert, and then dredged out mind-boggling amounts of mud to move the Nile to the docks, is beyond ridiculous. Maybe that's how Egyptologists would do it, but the existence of the pyramids proves the ancient Egyptians just weren't that stupid. The fact that they did dredge mind-boggling amounts of mud simply proves that the Nile water-levels were dropping rapidly at the end of the Old Kingdom. The fact that Egyptologists ignore the ancient Egyptian records of the pre-Dynastic era is probably for the best, imagine the nonsense they would have made up to explain the Osireion if they had to admit it is 15,000 years old! Wait... let me guess... time-travelers?The idea that the ancient Sumerians built their earliest cities in the marshlands of Southern Iraq using stone imported from other countries is entirely illogical, they would have simply built them using mud-bricks as they did in the later periods. As the stone had to have been locally quarried, the region could not have been a marshland when the earliest cities were built, meaning that the oldest levels of Uruk and Eridu must date back to before the region began turning into a marshland circa 9,000 years ago. The fact that they switched to using mud-bricks simply proves that the water-levels rose during the course of Sumerian history, flooding their farmlands, and ultimately forcing the Mesopotamian cultures to migrate northward to Akkadia, Babylonia, and Assyria. The fact that Assyriologists ignore the ancient Sumerian records of the antediluvian era is probably for the best, as they cannot even accept that the 1st Kish Dynasty went back to 25,000 BC, even though it has been proven that grains was being farmed in the region at that time.Unfortunately, the timeline of Egypt and Sumer are the two pillars that ancient history is built around. As the early Sumerians were trading with the early Egyptians, Assyriologists have been forced to synchronize the Mesopotamian timeline with the preposterous timeline used by Egyptologists. While this means that most of Sumerian history is has to be ignored, is also effects the timelines of all other Eurasian cultures in contact with the Mesopotamian. The Harappan civilization of ancient India was trading with the Sumerians throughout its history and went into decline around the end of the Sumero-Akkadian dynastic period, which means the entire Harappan civilization is forced to correlate with the short Conventional Mesopotamian Timeline. This forced the entire Harappan timeline into a period of 2000 years, even though some of the archaeological sites in Pakistan and India have been carbon-dated back to over 8000 BC. These broken timelines then fan out further pulling the Minoans and Greeks, Iranians, and Chinese into this confusing mess.