The two sets of stories Nebuchadnezzar’s and those of Saul, David, and Solomon are recorded in the same Bible. Just as contradictions between the same witness' testimony damage credibility of a witness, so also consistency improves credibility.
Let me say here that people with an anti Bible stance such as yourself talk so much about evidence, yet easily resort to name calling or stereotypes and platitudes in discussions.
If you go over all of our discussions in this exchange, you will find I have treated you as an equal deserving of rational discourse and address with good language, which is the standard for intellectual discourse. Can you say the same about your choice of language?
There is no scientific evidence for lack of credibility of Daniel in Babylon. Just because no texts mentioning him have been found does not imply he did not exist. Until texts mentioning Nebuchadnezzar etc. were found, the Bible was not trusted on that point either.
If we cannot continue this discussion with respectful language, and absent stereotypes, I suggest we put this discussion to rest.