Palean's Argument Analysis

Author of the above argument contends that Palean buckets were not uniquely Palean. The argument put forth by the author seems coherent at first glance; upon scrutiny, however, the argument appears seriously flawed and based on several questionable premises and assumption.
The most glaring error in the author's line of reasoning is his acceptance of archaeologists discovery. Firstly, they found a similar Palean basket in Lithos which was across the Brim river from Plaean. Paleans might do trade with these basket. They might sell basket for food, money and clothes. Lithos people might buy those basket from Palean and that how these bucket found in Lithos. The author jumps to conclusion on the basis of this has been not validated. Secondly, there is a chance that due to flood, a basket traveled
He further argue that no Palean boats have been found. Firstly, author forgot to include geographical condition. In ancient time, Brim river might not be that much deep and broad as it is now. Secondly, there is a chance that in old time, Palean and Lithos had a bridge which later got decimate due to nature disaster. So Palean might not invent any boat. This, if true, invalidates the entire argument. The argument certainly lacks legitimate evidential support and seems to have been formed out of this air.
Evidently, the author has not thought things through. He should have sought some credible reports, instead of relying on mentioned claims in argument. He should try to find more Palean baskets in other area also. Similarly he should examine old geographical conditions of Brim river. Therefore, the author needs to largely reconstruct his argument on these basis and fix the flaws by providing clear evidence. Without these changes, the author argument claiming Palean buckets were not uniquely Palean shall remain