No: '1,500 Scientists from Quantum Korea' Did Not Reject Climate Change — The Organization Does Not Exist

The claim states that 1,500 scientists affiliated with an organization called 'Quantum Korea' have collectively concluded that climate change does not exist. The verdict is false. No part of this claim holds up to basic scrutiny.

Start with the organization itself. A search of major academic databases — Web of Science and Scopus — turns up no institution called 'Quantum Korea' publishing peer-reviewed climate science. NASA's Scientific Consensus page, which catalogs recognized scientific bodies worldwide working on climate, lists no such organization. The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (2021), produced by 234 scientists from 66 countries, references no dissenting petition from 'Quantum Korea.' The group simply does not appear in any verified scientific registry or credible published record.

Now steelman the claim at its strongest: large numbers of credentialed signatories have been assembled before to challenge climate consensus — the Oregon Petition, for instance, gathered roughly 31,000 signatures. But as Skeptical Science documents in its analysis of manufactured consensus denial, those petitions consistently fail on closer inspection: signatories include non-climate scientists, unverifiable names, and in some cases outright fabrications. The number sounds impressive until you ask for the denominator. Powell (2019), writing in the Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, reviewed 11,602 peer-reviewed climate articles from 2013–2014 and found exactly one — 0.0086% — that explicitly rejected the consensus. Against that backdrop, 1,500 dissenters from a single unverifiable foreign institution is not just implausible; it is statistically impossible to reconcile with the published record.

The positive evidence for climate change is not thin or contested at the margins. Cook et al. (2013) analyzed 11,944 peer-reviewed abstracts published between 1991 and 2011 and found 97.1% endorsed the consensus that humans are causing recent global warming. The IPCC AR6 states flatly that it is 'unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land.' These are not the findings of one study or one body — they represent independent convergence across tens of thousands of papers and multiple international institutions.

What is genuinely true here? Climate science is not unanimous on every detail — projections of regional impacts, feedback sensitivities, and tipping-point timelines carry real uncertainty. Legitimate scientific debate exists at those edges. But the core claim — that warming is happening and humans are driving it — is not one of those contested edges. Conceding uncertainty at the margins is not the same as conceding the foundation.

This claim follows a textbook manipulation pattern: attach a large, round number ('1,500') to an authoritative-sounding but unverifiable institution ('Quantum Korea') to manufacture the appearance of organized scientific dissent. The tactic works because most readers cannot instantly fact-check a foreign institution's credentials. When you see a claim like this, ask three questions before sharing: Does this organization appear in any academic database? Do the named scientists publish peer-reviewed climate research? And what is the denominator — 1,500 out of how many total climate scientists worldwide?