Science YouTuber Gwedo Challenges Go Youn-jung’s Aurora Comments with Fact Check

Science entertainer Gwedo has sparked controversy by fact-checking actress Go Youn-jung’s poetic interpretation of the aurora, highlighting the growing tension between scientific accuracy and artistic expression in public discourse.

During a recent appearance on MBC’s “I Live Alone,” Go shared her emotional experience witnessing the aurora in Iceland, describing it as “the sound of stars.” The actress, visibly moved while recounting the memory, explained that the celestial phenomenon evoked such profound feelings that she found herself weeping at the sight.

“In Iceland, I saw the aurora for the first time in my life. It was truly magical,” Go said during the broadcast. “People say the aurora makes sounds, and I could actually hear it. It was like listening to the sound of stars.”

Her heartfelt description resonated with many viewers who appreciated the actress’s emotional vulnerability and poetic interpretation of the natural wonder. However, the sentiment was short-lived for some after science communicator Gwedo addressed her comments on his YouTube channel.

In his video, Gwedo presented scientific evidence contradicting Go’s claim, explaining that auroras don’t actually produce sounds detectable by human ears. “While electromagnetic waves are involved in aurora formation, these aren’t audible to humans,” he clarified. The YouTuber, known for his commitment to scientific accuracy, categorized Go’s statement as an “Extreme T” – his channel’s terminology for factually incorrect information.

The incident has ignited a broader debate about the intersection of science and artistic expression in public forums. Supporters of Go argue that her description was clearly metaphorical rather than literal, representing a subjective emotional experience rather than a scientific claim. They contend that artistic license should be respected, especially when someone is sharing a deeply personal moment.

“There’s a difference between making false scientific claims and sharing an emotional, subjective experience using poetic language,” noted cultural critic Kim Min-ji. “Not everything needs to be fact-checked through a strictly scientific lens.”

Others have defended Gwedo’s approach, arguing that public figures have a responsibility to be accurate when discussing natural phenomena, as their statements can shape public understanding. Science educators point out that addressing misconceptions is important for improving scientific literacy.

Dr. Park Joon-ho, an astrophysicist at Seoul National University, offered a middle ground. “While it’s important to maintain scientific accuracy, there’s also value in the subjective, emotional experience of natural wonders. The aurora does indeed create electromagnetic waves that can interfere with radio equipment, which might create sounds in certain circumstances, though not directly audible to the human ear without equipment.”

Interestingly, recent research has documented rare instances of sound phenomena associated with auroras, though the mechanisms are complex and not fully understood. Some observers in polar regions have reported hearing crackling or swishing sounds during intense aurora displays, though these accounts remain scientifically controversial.

The debate highlights a growing cultural tension in the age of social media, where the boundaries between scientific discourse, celebrity influence, and personal expression increasingly overlap. Public figures’ statements undergo unprecedented scrutiny, raising questions about when fact-checking is appropriate and when it might infringe on artistic or emotional expression.

Go Youn-jung has not publicly responded to Gwedo’s fact-check. The actress, who rose to prominence through roles in “Alchemy of Souls” and “Sweet Home,” is known for her thoughtful demeanor and candid sharing of personal experiences.

As the conversation continues across social media platforms, both supporters of scientific accuracy and defenders of artistic expression are finding this case illustrates a broader challenge: how to balance respect for empirical facts while preserving space for subjective human experience in public discourse.