Apparently the Buddha wasn’t even Indian anymore!
The Buddha was a “not-Greek” Scythian who lived in Northwestern China. He also founded Daoism apparently. More to come once I have delved further into these astounding “new findings” 
.
In case no one else enjoys drinking the Kool-Aid as much as me, I’m cutting and pasting a list of the book’s claims from the site that I linked to. Should make someone’s day:
[quote]1. The Buddha was not Indian (though nor was he Greek – the title of the book is misleading). Instead, the Buddha was Scythian (people living to the north of Persia and in contact with the Greeks), and he was called Shakyamuni because he was a Saka, a type of Scythian.
2. The Pali Canon, being composed and written more than 500 years after the death of the Buddha, offers very little reliable information about the Buddha. Most of the information in it has been made up to fit later models of what ‘Buddhism’ is that developed after about the first century CE.
3. The Buddha did not teach karma and rebirth, but only the balanced sceptical argument (Pyrrhonism) of the Middle Way, and the release he taught was not from the rounds of existence, but rather from the polarising constrictions of metaphysical views, both positive and negative.
4. However fundamental the Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path may now seem to Buddhism, these are later additions attributed to the Buddha.
5. Lao Tzu may be one and the same person as Gautama the Buddha, so that Taoism is effectively an early form of Buddhism in China.
6. Early Buddhism reacted not against Brahmanism but against Zoroastrianism.
7. Buddhism was the first religious movement to emerge in India, and others, such as Brahmanical Hinduism and Jainism, have copied it and sought to compete with it by claiming similar antiquity.
8. Buddhism did emerge in a setting with developing cities, but in Gandhara (north western India, more subject to Persian and Greek influence), not in the still-rural Ganges valley, even if the Buddha then travelled to the Ganges valley.
9. Pyrrho’s Scepticism was so radically discontinuous from other Greek philosophy that it must be considered (early) Buddhist rather than ‘Greek’. Pyrrho’s visit to India with Alexander’s armies thus becomes one of our key sources of information about early Buddhism.[/quote]A particular highlight:
The big problem with Indian texts from this period is that they lacked all historical sense, and are thus neither datable nor reliable.
So only rock edicts, alleged Greek & Persian EBTs (can someone fact check this claim?) and the some of the āgamāḥ make it as a “reliable” testament to the Buddha.