are not required, and the mechanism underlying the punctuated record is the drift within small and isolated populations, not the absence of competing species that would prevent species transmutation. Therefore, viewing Matthew (1831) as an anticipator of the theory of punctuated equilibria (e.g. Rampino, 2011) is as wrong as claiming his scheme identical to Darwin's or Wallace's. Matthew's contemporaries Accepting these irreconcilable differences in theory, a remaining route has been proposed, by which Darwin may have got to gain knowledge of Matthew's evolutionary ideas, that is, by knowledge being passed along a network of associates, by word of mouth, or an equally indirect pathway, such as via the influence of an editor. Evidence that such a network existed could be found if there was documentation of anyone having discussed Matthew's ideas on evolution. However, there is no single contemporary record of anyone having even recognised any value in Matthew's concept. Of the three sources to mention the existence of evolutionary content in On Naval Timber, two were rejections. Prideaux John Selby wrote, while an anonymous reviewer in the United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine wrote, {{blockquote|we disclaim participation in his rumination on the law of Nature, or on the outrages committed upon reason and justice by our burthens of hereditary nobility, entailed property, and insane enactments<ref name="USJNMM (1831)">Anon. (1831) "The United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine, 1831 part II. London: Colburn and Bentley. pp. 457-466.</ref>}} The other was in a review where the writer, assumed to be John Claudius Loudon, confesses to being confused, Darwin's contemporaries While completing a doctoral thesis on Disputes of Plagiarism in Darwin's Theory of Evolution at the University of Zielona Gora, where the journal Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy (F.A.G.) (Philosophical Aspects of Genesis) is based, Grzegorz Malec published a critical review of Sutton (2015), in which the main difficulty of valid identification of communication pathways was discussed, along with observations on Sutton's alternative approach,Natural Histories analysed the set of pathways that Sutton claims could have conveyed information on evolution from Matthew to Darwin and Wallace, also noting the same arbitrary determinism detected by Malec (above), they explain that, [Sutton] mistook the translation of a Swiss-French pastor's failure to teach his peasants proper potato cultivation with Matthew's observations on self-thinning in forest rejuvenations (Ellerby 1832). He failed to check whether anything in Matthew (1831) could be from non-English sources (Conrad 1834, Roget 1834).Roget,