about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,583 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Malachi and the second variable is GMO use in cotton in North Carolina.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the name Malachi gained popularity, more and more parents were drawn to its unique biblical roots. This led to a sudden surge in baby boys named Malachi across the nation. Now, you may be wondering, what does this have to do with GMO cotton in North Carolina? Well, it just so happens that a group of cotton farmers in North Carolina, who were also avid fans of unique baby names, collectively decided to honor the trend by genetically modifying their cotton plants and creating a new strain called "Malachi-Infused Cotton." The demand for this special, on-trend cotton skyrocketed, and before you know it, fields of Malachi cotton were waving in the North Carolina breeze, all thanks to the unforeseen influence of baby names on agricultural practices. Who would have thought that a popular baby name could sow the seeds of change in an entire industry? Funny how the world works, isn't it?

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a small town square in North Carolina bathed in warm, evocative lighting. A group of mischievous-looking, inexplicably similar individuals named Malachi gather in the center, standing amidst a lively crowd. In the background, vast cotton fields stretch out, their genetically modified organisms exuding an otherworldly glow. The image depicts the convergence of the rising popularity of the name Malachi and the implementation of GMOs in cotton cultivation, subtly hinting at the magical realism intertwining everyday life with enigmatic phenomena in the town. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Magic realism Voxel art Cyber folk Cutsy graphics Cute 2D animation
ChatGPT: Magic realism

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina, in the following situation: It turns out that all the Malachis were just really "seedy" individuals! As their numbers grew, so did the demand for cotton, leading farmers to turn to GMOs to "cultivate" more efficiently. It's like they say, when life gives you Malachis, you make GM-cotton!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a small town in North Carolina, the name Malachi becomes increasingly popular. A group of mischievous-looking Malachis are seen gathering in the town square, attracting a lot of attention. Meanwhile, nearby cotton fields stretch out in the distance, where farmers are using genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to increase the cotton yield. The scene shows the seemingly unrelated but simultaneous rise in popularity of the name Malachi and the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in the town.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ Magic realism ] and depicting this scene: In a small town in North Carolina, the name Malachi becomes increasingly popular. A group of mischievous-looking Malachis are seen gathering in the town square, attracting a lot of attention. Meanwhile, nearby cotton fields stretch out in the distance, where farmers are using genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to increase the cotton yield. The scene shows the seemingly unrelated but simultaneous rise in popularity of the name Malachi and the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in the town. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a small town square in North Carolina bathed in warm, evocative lighting. A group of mischievous-looking, inexplicably similar individuals named Malachi gather in the center, standing amidst a lively crowd. In the background, vast cotton fields stretch out, their genetically modified organisms exuding an otherworldly glow. The image depicts the convergence of the rising popularity of the name Malachi and the implementation of GMOs in cotton cultivation, subtly hinting at the magical realism intertwining everyday life with enigmatic phenomena in the town.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Popularity of the first name Malachi caused GMO use in cotton in North Carolina to increase. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina

The Journal of Agricultural Anomalies

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and USDA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2022.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. From the serendipitous discovery of penicillin to the striking correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks, the world of unexpected associations never fails to captivate our curiosity. In this vein, our study delves into the unconventional realm of nomenclature and its unlikely alliance with the agricultural landscape, specifically probing the relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Malachi" and the proliferation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the enchanting state of North Carolina.

The decision to explore this particular pairing was not arbitrary, but rather emerged from a blend of bemusement and scholarly inquisitiveness. While one may initially dismiss the notion of a connection between a moniker and the agricultural treatment of cotton as mere whimsy, our data-driven investigation elucidates a compelling correlation that commands serious attention. As we embark on this scholarly venture, it is with both a lighthearted sense of curiosity and a steadfast commitment to unraveling the improbable links that manifest in the intricate web of human nomenclature and agricultural technology.

Lurking beneath the surface of this seemingly unconventional inquiry lies the potential for unexpected revelations that challenge conventional wisdom. The laughter of fate echoes in the backdrop of our endeavor, urging us to unveil the underlying patterns that subvert the expected and prod the boundaries of our understanding. With a whimsical twinkle in our academic eye, we present the fruits of our labor, ushering in a scholarly dialogue that embraces the serendipitous and the unanticipated in the pursuit of knowledge.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a couple popular internet memes that are related to one of the topics.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. From the serendipitous discovery of penicillin to the striking correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks, the world of unexpected associations never fails to captivate our curiosity. In this vein, our study delves into the unconventional realm of nomenclature and its unlikely alliance with the agricultural landscape, specifically probing the relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Malachi" and the proliferation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the enchanting state of North Carolina.
The decision to explore this particular pairing was not arbitrary, but rather emerged from a blend of bemusement and scholarly inquisitiveness. While one may initially dismiss the notion of a connection between a moniker and the agricultural treatment of cotton as mere whimsy, our data-driven investigation elucidates a compelling correlation that commands serious attention. As we embark on this scholarly venture, it is with both a lighthearted sense of curiosity and a steadfast commitment to unraveling the improbable links that manifest in the intricate web of human nomenclature and agricultural technology.
Lurking beneath the surface of this seemingly unconventional inquiry lies the potential for unexpected revelations that challenge conventional wisdom. The laughter of fate echoes in the backdrop of our endeavor, urging us to unveil the underlying patterns that subvert the expected and prod the boundaries of our understanding. With a whimsical twinkle in our academic eye, we present the fruits of our labor, ushering in a scholarly dialogue that embraces the serendipitous and the unanticipated in the pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.'s study, "The Correlation of Name Popularity and Agricultural Trends in the US," the authors find that the correlation between individual first names and agricultural practices has largely been overlooked in the academic literature. However, as researchers delve into the uncharted realms of nomenclature, unexpected findings continue to surface. Similarly, Doe and Jones, in their work "Trends in Cotton Farming and Quirky Name Associations," highlight the potential influence of individual names on the agricultural landscape, paving the way for the exploration of unconventional linkages in otherwise disparate domains.

As the inquiry extends beyond traditional scholarly boundaries, it draws inspiration from real-life narratives and fictional landscapes alike. Works such as "The Omnivore's Dilemma" and "Guns, Germs, and Steel" offer insights into agricultural practices and societal developments, guiding our contemplation of the intricate tapestry that is cotton farming in North Carolina. On a lighter note, the fantastical realms depicted in "The Secret Garden" and the beckoning call of "Perks of Being a Wallflower" prompt reflection on the enigmatic nature of our study's whimsical premise.

Amidst the serious pursuit of knowledge, it is essential not to overlook the cultural echoes that reverberate through the digital sphere. Memes such as the "Malachi-Cotton Crop Connection" and "GMOs: The Naming Game" whimsically encapsulate the essence of our investigation, transcending the scholarly confines to engage with a broader audience in the pursuit of unconventional wisdom.

Continuing on this enthralling quest, the research seeks to elevate the unexpected connections that lurk beneath the veneer of the ordinary, unveiling the captivating symphony of nomenclature and agricultural innovation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and USDA . You used data from 2000 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. From the serendipitous discovery of penicillin to the striking correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks, the world of unexpected associations never fails to captivate our curiosity. In this vein, our study delves into the unconventional realm of nomenclature and its unlikely alliance with the agricultural landscape, specifically probing the relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Malachi" and the proliferation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the enchanting state of North Carolina.
The decision to explore this particular pairing was not arbitrary, but rather emerged from a blend of bemusement and scholarly inquisitiveness. While one may initially dismiss the notion of a connection between a moniker and the agricultural treatment of cotton as mere whimsy, our data-driven investigation elucidates a compelling correlation that commands serious attention. As we embark on this scholarly venture, it is with both a lighthearted sense of curiosity and a steadfast commitment to unraveling the improbable links that manifest in the intricate web of human nomenclature and agricultural technology.
Lurking beneath the surface of this seemingly unconventional inquiry lies the potential for unexpected revelations that challenge conventional wisdom. The laughter of fate echoes in the backdrop of our endeavor, urging us to unveil the underlying patterns that subvert the expected and prod the boundaries of our understanding. With a whimsical twinkle in our academic eye, we present the fruits of our labor, ushering in a scholarly dialogue that embraces the serendipitous and the unanticipated in the pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the enigmatic connection between the appellation "Malachi" and the propagation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the cotton fields of North Carolina, a methodological approach combining statistical analysis and agricultural data was deployed. The first step in this whimsically perplexing journey involved gathering data from the United States Social Security Administration to ascertain the popularity of the name "Malachi" in the period from 2000 to 2022. This entailed sifting through mountains of bureaucratic records, seeking the elusive traces of this distinctive moniker amidst the colorful tapestry of American nomenclature. Consequently, the numerical prevalence of "Malachi" was meticulously tabulated, allowing for the formulation of a multifaceted picture of its trajectory through the years.

Simultaneously, data on the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming in North Carolina was procured from the prodigious repository of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The abundance of agricultural statistics served as both a treasure trove and a labyrinth, necessitating a judicious approach to navigating the intricate landscape of genetically modified cotton cultivation. This process involved parsing through an array of esoteric agricultural indicators, teasing out the pertinent information on GMO usage with a blend of scholarly acumen and disarming tenacity.

With the two datasets in hand, an intricate dance of statistical analysis ensued. Utilizing the venerable tool of correlation coefficients, we sought to discern any semblance of a relationship between the ebb and flow of "Malachi" popularity and the prevalence of GMOs in the cotton fields of North Carolina. The resulting statistical framework provided a canvas upon which the intricate tapestry of nomenclature and agricultural technology could be discerned, albeit with a whimsical and improbable twist.

The laborious process of data collection, curation, and analysis culminated in the unearthing of a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261, evoking a sense of astonishment typically reserved for whimsical coincidences and improbable encounters. Moreover, the p-value, a stalwart indicator of statistical significance, revealed itself to be less than 0.01, further accentuating the profound and unforeseen nature of the Malachi-GMO correlation. The improbable conjunction of a peculiar name and the agricultural avant-garde beckons forth a scholarly dialogue that transcends the boundaries of conventional expectations, inviting further inquiries into the elusive interplay between nomenclature and agricultural innovation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and USDA .

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9230261, r-squared of 0.8519773, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. From the serendipitous discovery of penicillin to the striking correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks, the world of unexpected associations never fails to captivate our curiosity. In this vein, our study delves into the unconventional realm of nomenclature and its unlikely alliance with the agricultural landscape, specifically probing the relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Malachi" and the proliferation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the enchanting state of North Carolina.
The decision to explore this particular pairing was not arbitrary, but rather emerged from a blend of bemusement and scholarly inquisitiveness. While one may initially dismiss the notion of a connection between a moniker and the agricultural treatment of cotton as mere whimsy, our data-driven investigation elucidates a compelling correlation that commands serious attention. As we embark on this scholarly venture, it is with both a lighthearted sense of curiosity and a steadfast commitment to unraveling the improbable links that manifest in the intricate web of human nomenclature and agricultural technology.
Lurking beneath the surface of this seemingly unconventional inquiry lies the potential for unexpected revelations that challenge conventional wisdom. The laughter of fate echoes in the backdrop of our endeavor, urging us to unveil the underlying patterns that subvert the expected and prod the boundaries of our understanding. With a whimsical twinkle in our academic eye, we present the fruits of our labor, ushering in a scholarly dialogue that embraces the serendipitous and the unanticipated in the pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) encompassing the years 2000 to 2022 yielded intriguing findings. Our study unveiled a remarkably strong positive correlation between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9230261. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) indicated that approximately 85.20% of the variability in GMO cotton use in North Carolina can be explained by the popularity of the name "Malachi," suggesting a substantial degree of association between the two variables.

Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides robust evidence of the statistical significance of the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation in North Carolina, solidifying the validity of our findings. This p-value indicates that the observed correlation is highly unlikely to be a result of random chance, adding weight to the credibility of the identified association.

A visual representation of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton use in North Carolina is depicted in Figure 1. The scatterplot exhibits a strikingly linear pattern, visually reinforcing the strong positive correlation uncovered in our analysis.

This unexpected and slightly whimsical connection between the naming trends and agricultural practices serves as a thought-provoking reminder that serendipitous relationships can exist in even the most unexpected pairings. It is a charming testament to the delightful unpredictability of the scientific world, demonstrating how the fusion of disparate fields can lead to unforeseen discoveries and spark novel lines of inquiry in the pursuit of knowledge.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.'s study, "The Correlation of Name Popularity and Agricultural Trends in the US," the authors find that the correlation between individual first names and agricultural practices has largely been overlooked in the academic literature. However, as researchers delve into the uncharted realms of nomenclature, unexpected findings continue to surface. Similarly, Doe and Jones, in their work "Trends in Cotton Farming and Quirky Name Associations," highlight the potential influence of individual names on the agricultural landscape, paving the way for the exploration of unconventional linkages in otherwise disparate domains.
As the inquiry extends beyond traditional scholarly boundaries, it draws inspiration from real-life narratives and fictional landscapes alike. Works such as "The Omnivore's Dilemma" and "Guns, Germs, and Steel" offer insights into agricultural practices and societal developments, guiding our contemplation of the intricate tapestry that is cotton farming in North Carolina. On a lighter note, the fantastical realms depicted in "The Secret Garden" and the beckoning call of "Perks of Being a Wallflower" prompt reflection on the enigmatic nature of our study's whimsical premise.
Amidst the serious pursuit of knowledge, it is essential not to overlook the cultural echoes that reverberate through the digital sphere. Memes such as the "Malachi-Cotton Crop Connection" and "GMOs: The Naming Game" whimsically encapsulate the essence of our investigation, transcending the scholarly confines to engage with a broader audience in the pursuit of unconventional wisdom.
Continuing on this enthralling quest, the research seeks to elevate the unexpected connections that lurk beneath the veneer of the ordinary, unveiling the captivating symphony of nomenclature and agricultural innovation.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) encompassing the years 2000 to 2022 yielded intriguing findings. Our study unveiled a remarkably strong positive correlation between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9230261. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) indicated that approximately 85.20% of the variability in GMO cotton use in North Carolina can be explained by the popularity of the name "Malachi," suggesting a substantial degree of association between the two variables.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides robust evidence of the statistical significance of the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation in North Carolina, solidifying the validity of our findings. This p-value indicates that the observed correlation is highly unlikely to be a result of random chance, adding weight to the credibility of the identified association.
A visual representation of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton use in North Carolina is depicted in Figure 1. The scatterplot exhibits a strikingly linear pattern, visually reinforcing the strong positive correlation uncovered in our analysis.
This unexpected and slightly whimsical connection between the naming trends and agricultural practices serves as a thought-provoking reminder that serendipitous relationships can exist in even the most unexpected pairings. It is a charming testament to the delightful unpredictability of the scientific world, demonstrating how the fusion of disparate fields can lead to unforeseen discoveries and spark novel lines of inquiry in the pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The emergence of a compelling association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina lends credence to the unexplored realm of nomenclature-influenced agricultural practices. Notably, our findings accentuate the significance of considering diverse and unconventional variables in agricultural and sociological analyses, echoing the sentiments put forth by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones. The unexpected connection unraveled in our study aligns with the quirky yet thought-provoking narratives advanced in both real-life and fictional spheres.

The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and the statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 provide empirical support for the intriguing relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation. These results resonate with the underexplored whimsical connections highlighted in the works of Smith et al. and Doe and Jones, affirming the premise that seemingly incongruous factors can be influential in agricultural landscapes. It is a fascinating correlation that echoes the unexpected wisdom uncovered in the "Trends in Cotton Farming and Quirky Name Associations," reinforcing the notion that unconventional linkages can offer valuable insights into agricultural trends.

The visual representation in Figure 1 further underscores the strikingly linear pattern between the popularity of the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton use in North Carolina, providing a whimsical yet visually compelling testament to the unpredictability of scientific inquiry. This unexpected discovery echoes the broader cultural echoes and memes encapsulated in popular references, demonstrating the capacity for unconventional wisdom to transcend scholarly confines.

In essence, our study provides an enlightening testament to the potential influence of nomenclature on agricultural innovation. While the whimsical nature of the Malachi-Mon GMO correlation may elicit a sense of amusement, it also serves as a reminder of the vibrant unpredictability of scientific inquiry. The study paves the way for future inquiries into the intersection of naming trends and agricultural technology, inviting scholars to delve into the uncharted realms of nomenclature to unravel potentially unexpected connections in the pursuit of knowledge.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Malachi and GMO use in cotton in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. From the serendipitous discovery of penicillin to the striking correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks, the world of unexpected associations never fails to captivate our curiosity. In this vein, our study delves into the unconventional realm of nomenclature and its unlikely alliance with the agricultural landscape, specifically probing the relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Malachi" and the proliferation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the enchanting state of North Carolina.
The decision to explore this particular pairing was not arbitrary, but rather emerged from a blend of bemusement and scholarly inquisitiveness. While one may initially dismiss the notion of a connection between a moniker and the agricultural treatment of cotton as mere whimsy, our data-driven investigation elucidates a compelling correlation that commands serious attention. As we embark on this scholarly venture, it is with both a lighthearted sense of curiosity and a steadfast commitment to unraveling the improbable links that manifest in the intricate web of human nomenclature and agricultural technology.
Lurking beneath the surface of this seemingly unconventional inquiry lies the potential for unexpected revelations that challenge conventional wisdom. The laughter of fate echoes in the backdrop of our endeavor, urging us to unveil the underlying patterns that subvert the expected and prod the boundaries of our understanding. With a whimsical twinkle in our academic eye, we present the fruits of our labor, ushering in a scholarly dialogue that embraces the serendipitous and the unanticipated in the pursuit of knowledge.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) encompassing the years 2000 to 2022 yielded intriguing findings. Our study unveiled a remarkably strong positive correlation between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9230261. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) indicated that approximately 85.20% of the variability in GMO cotton use in North Carolina can be explained by the popularity of the name "Malachi," suggesting a substantial degree of association between the two variables.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides robust evidence of the statistical significance of the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation in North Carolina, solidifying the validity of our findings. This p-value indicates that the observed correlation is highly unlikely to be a result of random chance, adding weight to the credibility of the identified association.
A visual representation of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton use in North Carolina is depicted in Figure 1. The scatterplot exhibits a strikingly linear pattern, visually reinforcing the strong positive correlation uncovered in our analysis.
This unexpected and slightly whimsical connection between the naming trends and agricultural practices serves as a thought-provoking reminder that serendipitous relationships can exist in even the most unexpected pairings. It is a charming testament to the delightful unpredictability of the scientific world, demonstrating how the fusion of disparate fields can lead to unforeseen discoveries and spark novel lines of inquiry in the pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

The intriguing correlation between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina has undoubtedly piqued our scholarly curiosity. Our findings, revealing a remarkably strong positive correlation with a correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value, serve as a whimsical testament to the delightful unpredictability of the scientific world.

The unexpected bond between nomenclature and agricultural technology adds a touch of whimsy to the often serious field of research. It seems that Malachi may indeed have a certain "gene"-ius influence on the agricultural landscape, much like an unexpected plot twist in a captivating novel.

However, as entertaining as this correlation may be, we must resist the temptation to "cotton" to further investigations in this area. The pursuit of knowledge may be productive, but the time has come to "harvest" our findings and move on to other, less whimsical, areas of research. After all, there are "seedier" correlations waiting to be explored.

In conclusion, while the connection between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation in North Carolina may seem lighthearted and improbable at first glance, our study emphasizes the importance of considering even the most unconventional factors in agricultural and sociological analyses. It is with a sense of academic wonder and a fair share of amusement that we close this chapter, leaving the door open for future explorations that embrace the serendipitous and the unexpected.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agricultural Anomalies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Genetic Agri-Intelligence Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Un-Cotton-named Popularity: Exploring the Malachi-Mon GMO Correlation in North Carolina with an abstract of This paper examines the association between the popularity of the first name "Malachi" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in North Carolina. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2000 to 2022. Our findings reveal a notable correlation coefficient of 0.9230261 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The study employs a mix of statistical and agricultural methodology, drawing attention to the unanticipated link between the naming trends and agricultural practices. While the relationship between the name "Malachi" and GMO cotton cultivation may seem whimsical at first glance, our research underscores the importance of considering all factors, even those seemingly unrelated, in agricultural and sociological analyses. Our results provoke a mix of curiosity and bewilderment, leading to future inquiries and potentially unexpected discoveries in the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural technology.

ChatGPT:

Malachi popularity, genetically modified organisms, GMO, cotton farming, North Carolina, correlation analysis, Social Security Administration, United States Department of Agriculture, USDA, statistical analysis, agricultural methodology, naming trends, agricultural practices, agricultural technology.

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Popularity of the first name Malachi
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Malachi
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Malachi

GMO use in cotton in North Carolina
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in North Carolina genetically modified with both Bt and HT
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton in North Carolina

Correlation r = 0.9230261 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.8519773 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 85.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., GMO use in cotton in North Carolina) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Malachi) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 3.6E-10. 0.0000000003594766628963540400
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.92 in 3.6E-8% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 2,781,821,751 random variables You don't actually need 2 billion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.82, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Popularity of the first name Malachi (Babies born)7771335168619252261257027892720246123612423236023352341240526062641254625102454239023152273
GMO use in cotton in North Carolina (GMO cotton %)7684869391959893959697969694979796969397969495




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,213 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 635,695,369 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([777,1335,1686,1925,2261,2570,2789,2720,2461,2361,2423,2360,2335,2341,2405,2606,2641,2546,2510,2454,2390,2315,2273,])
array_2 = np.array([76,84,86,93,91,95,98,93,95,96,97,96,96,94,97,97,96,96,93,97,96,94,95,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Malachi"
array_2_name = "GMO use in cotton in North Carolina"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Cheers to you for rating this correlation!


Correlation ID: 2583 · Black Variable ID: 3025 · Red Variable ID: 809
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0