This was the recent (friendly) response of an editor. He wrote to me, that if there are any real errors, they would be corrected by later papers.
“Fortifying the Corrective Nature of Post-publication Peer Review: Identifying Weaknesses, Use of Journal Clubs, and Rewarding Conscientious Behavior”, a great paper that clearly says
Science is currently not a spontaneously self-corrective process because moral values will always fluctuate or because there will always be deficits in credibility, in part as a result of the wide social background or economic status of scientists around the world. Rather, the correction of science, and its literature, is a pro-active process that requires the involvement of conscientious individuals who would like to replicate studies and who intend to engage with each other to see such errors eliminated.