John van Wyhe, an American-born Darwin scholar based at the University of Singapore, has for many years been the bane of the world's Wallace scholars. The reason for this is that he has steadily been publishing a stream of articles and books 're-interpreting' many decades of careful historical research on Wallace by other scholars and reaching diametrically opposed conclusions to them. His revisionist work would be welcome if it stood up to careful examination, but unfortunately it does not. Every sensational claim he has made has been found to be the result of 'cherry-picking' the facts, ignoring other facts which go against his views, or cleverly twisting information to make it appear to bolster his conclusions. All of his major 'new' claims have been carefully scrutinised by Wallace scholars and articles have been published which rebuke his interpretations. Not a single major 'new' interpretation has been found to stand up to close examination. Despite this he recently published an article entitled "A.R. Wallace in the light of historical method" which list 17 important points he believes he has disproven [Click HERE to download pdf]. However, in this paper he completely ignores the many articles written by Wallace scholars which rebuke his interpretations... Recently five Wallace experts have written a response to his article which points this shortcoming out. This paper is entitled "Discussion on ‘A. R. Wallace in the light of historical method’ by John van Wyhe" [Click HERE to download pdf].