Before you presume to deliver lectures on laziness, I suggest you do the following:
Stop lazily plagiarising other people’s bad ideas. As here: Sitchin’s ‘he got it all from a book’ (with the very minor adjustment of naming Rosellini instead of Wilkinson) and the late Alan Alford’s ‘all he needed to do was find an inscription elsewhere and copy it’.
Do the work it would take to understand the issue and understand what’s being said to you. You have very plainly understood neither.
It’s already been explained to you that Rosellini misread and misattributed the name Xnmw xwfw. And which cartouche name appears most frequently in the chambers? That’s right! Xnmw xwfw, the name a forger guided by Rosellini would not have used! The name xwfw appears just once.
This before we note the presence in the chambers of the Horus name of Khufu, Hr mDdw, which no one so much as recognised as a name in 1837.
Canonically, a Horus name appears in a serekh. Whoever wrote the relevant inscriptions knew, not only that is was a name but also that such a name could appear without the serekh in a linear (horizontal) inscription. This is nontrivial knowledge: anyone who possessed it in 1837 would have a strong claim to being the leading Egyptologist of the day — and that, Creighton, would have given Vyse all the fame he could handle, without the crazy risk of resorting to forgery. Needs must not.
As for the character which tells us that these names — comprising the royal names, plus the other characters — are crew names: that wasn’t understood until the early 20th century.
All he had to do was find inscriptions and copy them . . . Yeah, right: first of all, he’d have to recognise them as the right inscriptions to copy. Brighter readers will work out how difficult that would be from what I’ve written above.
In short, Creighton, Merrell is completely right: it would have taken a time machine.
You are completely wrong, which makes your ill-mannered sarcasm (unacceptable in any case) doubly unwarranted.