[not2b]

This comment suggests a lack of understanding of the role of references in papers. They aren't like lemmas in proofs. Often an author will reference a work that tried a different approach to solve the same problem the authors are trying to solve, and whether that other paper is problematic or not has nothing to do with the correctness of the paper that refers to the other work.

Now, it's possible that in a particular case, paper B assumes the correctness of a result in paper A and depends on it. But that isn't going to be the case with most references.

[oopsallmagic]

If there were grant money for incorrectly claiming "this other thing that isn't a computer behaves just like a computer", well, we wouldn't need VCs anymore.