You might reasonably ask, what purpose is served by highlighting false information, whether in print or on-line? After all, we all make a few mistakes. All mistakes matter but when a publication is riddled with them this is a cause for major concern and one cannot have much confidence in any of the content.
Increasingly, others read, accept, quote, refer to, nowadays "cite" such publications on the assumption they are accurate and reliable. It is too easy nowadays to get something published, indeed one can more or less 'publish' on-line whatever one wants - regardless of its reliability.
I have been amazed at the numbers of articles published in numerous journals which claim the articles are "peer-reviewed" when they are no such thing! I find myself being asked by obscure 'International' journals to peer-review articles unrelated to my areas of expertise!
And it seems that by deciding to undertake a field-trip to supposedly investigate an 'Endangered' species or the much loved 'Critically Endangered' species in the Himalaya then funds are made available to cover the costs of an extraordinary range of Indian 'botanists' and related scientists. One even finds botanists from Southern India, with no familiarity with or relevant expertise travelling large distance to the NW Himalaya to study the region's 'rare' plants! Are there no 'rare' plants in their own states to study - which would surely be more cost-effective travel-wise and they might just actually have some knowledge of such plants?
Having accumulated considerable knowledge of Himalayan flora and being a dedicated and serious-minded botanist, it seems to me that I am duty-bound to draw attention to false claims and questionable information - which all too often is blindly copied and quoted. This is not an insignificant matter, as any proper scientist must surely agree.
I am, for the present, dividing this into a number of sections: