a) Yes it has. I have seen this debating tactic many times...grab on one minute, irrelevant, detail from the opposition and cling to it like a tick...as if it says something important about the debate itself. Whether one person actually said those exact words in a book is irrelevant. What matters is, does the evidence support that assertion? Based on the fact that the evidence you supplied seems largely to support it, I consider your debating tactic to be an attempted distraction at best. And, yes, I admit, I do find that rather annoying.

b) From what I have read, any evidence of Hebrews in Egypt seems to be controversial at the very least. I would say the burden of proof is on those who claim otherwise. So far, I have not seen any contrary evidence that is especially compelling. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? Not based on current evidence. The Bible itself is very, very unreliable as a historical document.

And I am not really fantasizing about Jennifer Anniston. Tina Turner, maybe...