Many feel the need for a close reason that expresses that the basic premises of the question are incorrect (factual errors etc.). Shouldn't there be a need for this close reason on many (most?) SE sites? I first thought that the close reason "primarily opinion-based" could be interpreted to cover this, but it is clearly aimed to discourage general discussion-style questions without a well defined answer. At Biology SE this problem often comes up on "controversial" issues such as evolution and parts of human biology, where some questions are ideologically based and built on flawed premises, and where the OP refuses to modify the phrasing of their question to make it answerable. I can imagine that this problem could come up in many science-based SE-sites. An alternative would naturally be to include this as a custom close reason on some SE sites, but if it is relevant for many sites this seems a bit redundant. The old close reason "Not a real question" was actually a better fit for this problem, but still not perfect.
In the discussion I'm referring to above, one example/suggestion for the close reason was given (as a starting point for discussion):
The premise of your question relies on factually incorrect information, and thus, your question cannot be answered in its current form.
To be clear, the initial aim should always be to improve questions with constructive comments. The main use of this close reason would be situations where the OP is not really interested in honest discussion and a scientifically based Q&A. Thoughts?
Edit: Based on the comments, I want to clarify that the point of this close reason would not be to discourage controversial issues and a broad range of topics. The main use should be to close questions that superficially are phrased as valid within the topic area of a site, but that go against basic principes or ignore fundamental knowledge. A Q&A is hardly the place to challenge e.g. basic evolutionary theory with an argument based on factual mistakes. However, the current close reasons might be sufficient and I appreciate the discussion.
Note: This question is inspired by a discussion over custom close reasons at Biology SE, and was first posted as a answer to Closing changes: [on hold...]. I thought that it might be more useful as a separate discussion, therefore the reposting.