I take the Bible as a historical document which attempts to account history as well as any other document if not far more accurately. Research is often biased by the researchers, an they often make their conclusions based on their biases, so I see no reason for a Hindu, Muslim, Taoist, Satanists, etc biased historian to try an confirm Abraham, Moses, David or Jericho. Even if someone who says they are a Christian with a Christian bias is a historian an says Jericho was abandonded around the time the Israelites tribes supposedly defeated it, I would if I cared what that historian thought examine his observations an conclusions further. In any event it sounds to me that observations that it was abandoned would not discount the biblical passage, it would just mean instead of 100k people in Jericho their were 2k, or 500, their findings that it was abandonded would sort of confirm something happened their like the event described in the bible.

Evolution is a theory based on underlying presumptions which are also theories no one has observed evolution, no one has observed the underlying theories. So why should there theories negatively impact my belief in the truth in the Bible. Bible doesn't even pretend to describe whatever mechanisms God used to create, perhaps God used evolution an timetraveled. It is really comparing apples an oranges different but related things.

Here look at this they reignited the brimstone which had remained dormant for 3800 years an it immediately caught on fire @ 18:36 priceless imagery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2xv3XwOVaQ&feature=share

There is truth in the Bible, folks can always choose to doubt since folks will never have perfect knowledge like God, how is there sulfur like that around the area described as soddom an Gomorrah, folks can take that fact as something the authors of the Bible knew an decided to include in the stories or they can take that as evidence that the stories are true. There is evidence but folks biases effect how they will choose to view it.