Occasionally I encounter papers in which the authors expend significant effort to either:
- prove an hypothesis that I know to be false;
- promote a new theory that I know to be fundamentally flawed.
To do this, the authors use methods such as forging experimental results, misinterpreting results or misinterpreting cited references.
As I know that the views presented in the paper are false, I can deduce from the paper that the author must have favored promoting their views over correctness. However someone less educated in the topic might not be aware of this and base their work on this paper as they consider the presented views to be scientifically proven.
Is there a commonly accepted method to flag such a paper, so that future readers will be aware that the presented views are forged and false?