There must be a better argument that Exodus is not accurate than to admit that certain details are actually plausible or fit what we know about Egypt from other sources. He does note that Hoffmeirer leaves out details that argue against claims of authenticity, but does not actually give any examples. Claims of Biblical inerrancy are certainly problematic, but just as it is true that the accuracy of some details does not make the story true, presumably minor errors in some details would not necessarily make it totally false. I think the biggest argument against Exodus is the total lack of archeological evidence of a large number of people spending 40 years in the desert.