Posted again because it seems some people never noticed it.....
Then why have you, an amateur, noticed this while scholars, who spend their entire lives, nay, make their
livings off of, studying these matters, determining the origins of religion, never notice these?
Have you considered that they already considered this option, and ruled it out as unlikely?
I notice your most often posting from Wikipedia. While the site has gotten WAY better than when it started, that's hardly reliable scholarship.
First of all, you claim that, essentially, Mount Sinai was a volcano. The thing is, it's actually not known where Mount Sinai may have been located. Let's assume, for a moment, that the exodus did historically happen, roughly as it was described in the Bible.
You're constantly pointing out volcanoes in Saudi Arabia, but you seem to forget that the Israelites never ended up in Saudi Arabia; the currently most accepted route is along the coast of the Sinai Penninsula. Here's the map from one of the links you have:
Look at the locations of the only three volcanoes. Now, compare those to the accepted possible route:
Notice how the route NEVER ONCE goes into the Arabian peninsula, let alone anywhere near those volcanoes.
Also, notice how, at the location of Mount Sinai, there's a question mark next to it, and in parenthesis, the word "Horeb". That is the most likely place according to my research. AND, according to my research, there is no real volcanic activity on the Sinai Peninsula, nor has there ever been.