about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,907 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton in Texas and the second variable is Gasoline pumped in Finland.  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 Texas cut back on GMO cotton, there was less need for fuel, leading to a reduction in gasoline production. The situation truly went from "organic" to "inorganic" in the cotton fields, creating a gin-credible ripple effect. The Finnish thought of this correlation as utterly unpresidented. We can say it really oil started with the seeds of change in Texas!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' but with a twist. Depict in this scene: In a Texas cotton field, farmers can be seen tending to non-GMO cotton plants under the bright sun. Meanwhile, in Finland, a gas station stands with fewer cars lining up for fuel, leading to a decrease in gasoline pumped. In the background of both scenes, a large banner reading "No GMO-themed parties" is being taken down, symbolic of the declining demand for genetically-enhanced energy drinks. The setting of the image should have a futuristic and cosmic aspect, resembling the iconic Star Wars universe, with the cotton field and gas station integrated into the otherworldly landscape. The image should exude a sense of juxtaposition between earthly activities and a space-age environment. 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: GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. 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: Glitch art Data cyber art Whimsical illustration An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' Charcoal
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'

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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland, in the following situation: Because cotton in Texas was no longer Gene-Modified, it led to a decrease in GMO-themed parties, where attendees fueled up with genetically-enhanced energy drinks. With less demand for GMO pick-me-ups, Finland's gasoline consumption dropped, causing a decrease in pumped gasoline. It's a classic case of party-fueled global energy trends!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a Texas cotton field, farmers can be seen tending to non-GMO cotton plants under the bright sun. Meanwhile, in Finland, a gas station stands with fewer cars lining up for fuel, leading to a decrease in gasoline pumped. In the background of both scenes, a large banner reading "No GMO-themed parties" is being taken down, symbolic of the declining demand for genetically-enhanced energy drinks.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' ] and depicting this scene: In a Texas cotton field, farmers can be seen tending to non-GMO cotton plants under the bright sun. Meanwhile, in Finland, a gas station stands with fewer cars lining up for fuel, leading to a decrease in gasoline pumped. In the background of both scenes, a large banner reading "No GMO-themed parties" is being taken down, symbolic of the declining demand for genetically-enhanced energy drinks. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' but with a twist. Depict in this scene: In a Texas cotton field, farmers can be seen tending to non-GMO cotton plants under the bright sun. Meanwhile, in Finland, a gas station stands with fewer cars lining up for fuel, leading to a decrease in gasoline pumped. In the background of both scenes, a large banner reading "No GMO-themed parties" is being taken down, symbolic of the declining demand for genetically-enhanced energy drinks. The setting of the image should have a futuristic and cosmic aspect, resembling the iconic Star Wars universe, with the cotton field and gas station integrated into the otherworldly landscape. The image should exude a sense of juxtaposition between earthly activities and a space-age environment.

*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 a decrease in GMO use in cotton in Texas caused Gasoline pumped in Finland to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
: Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

The Journal of Transcontinental Agro-Energy Studies

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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. 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, just make it sound clever.

Your research team used data from USDA and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 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]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In the realm of scientific inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often arise from the most unexpected connections. The improbable affiliation between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in the vast fields of Texas and the tumultuous consumption of gasoline in the far reaches of Finland, though seemingly incongruent, has piqued the curiosity of researchers and academics alike. This unlikely nexus, while initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical expressions, has drawn our attention to the inherent interconnectedness of global phenomena and has, dare I say, fueled our enthusiasm for unearthing hidden patterns and relationships amidst the bewildering complexity of our world.

The intertwining of GMOs and gasoline, as unlikely bedfellows as they may seem, beckons us to embark on a journey of intellectual exploration and statistical scrutiny. By harnessing the formidable power of data, we aim to shed light on this curious coalescence, analyzing a dataset spanning over two decades with all the fervor and rigor that dedicated researchers are known for. As academics, we strive not only to unravel the mysteries that lie within the numbers but also to infuse our analysis with a dash of humor and levity, for a statistical undertaking need not be devoid of the occasional witticism and playful banter.

Statistical correlations, often the bread and butter of quantitative research, have led us down uncharted avenues of inquiry, unveiling surprising revelations and raising more than a few eyebrows. Our analysis, underpinned by a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 and a significance level that would make even the most hardened skeptics raise an intrigued eyebrow (p < 0.01), has thrust this unexpected alliance into the spotlight, demanding further investigation and prompting a few chuckles along the way.

As we delve into the labyrinthine world of GMOs and gasoline, we invite the reader to join us on a jovial yet intellectually stimulating expedition, where the journey is as enriching as the destination. With each regression analysis and scatter plot, we hope to not only elucidate the enigmatic connection between these two seemingly disparate variables but also sprinkle in a few statistical puns and whimsical observations for good measure. Let us unravel this scientific conundrum with a blend of scholarly rigor and lighthearted amusement, for in the realm of inquiry, as in life, a well-placed quip can illuminate the path to discovery.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of scientific inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often arise from the most unexpected connections. The improbable affiliation between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in the vast fields of Texas and the tumultuous consumption of gasoline in the far reaches of Finland, though seemingly incongruent, has piqued the curiosity of researchers and academics alike. This unlikely nexus, while initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical expressions, has drawn our attention to the inherent interconnectedness of global phenomena and has, dare I say, fueled our enthusiasm for unearthing hidden patterns and relationships amidst the bewildering complexity of our world.
The intertwining of GMOs and gasoline, as unlikely bedfellows as they may seem, beckons us to embark on a journey of intellectual exploration and statistical scrutiny. By harnessing the formidable power of data, we aim to shed light on this curious coalescence, analyzing a dataset spanning over two decades with all the fervor and rigor that dedicated researchers are known for. As academics, we strive not only to unravel the mysteries that lie within the numbers but also to infuse our analysis with a dash of humor and levity, for a statistical undertaking need not be devoid of the occasional witticism and playful banter.
Statistical correlations, often the bread and butter of quantitative research, have led us down uncharted avenues of inquiry, unveiling surprising revelations and raising more than a few eyebrows. Our analysis, underpinned by a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 and a significance level that would make even the most hardened skeptics raise an intrigued eyebrow (p < 0.01), has thrust this unexpected alliance into the spotlight, demanding further investigation and prompting a few chuckles along the way.
As we delve into the labyrinthine world of GMOs and gasoline, we invite the reader to join us on a jovial yet intellectually stimulating expedition, where the journey is as enriching as the destination. With each regression analysis and scatter plot, we hope to not only elucidate the enigmatic connection between these two seemingly disparate variables but also sprinkle in a few statistical puns and whimsical observations for good measure. Let us unravel this scientific conundrum with a blend of scholarly rigor and lighthearted amusement, for in the realm of inquiry, as in life, a well-placed quip can illuminate the path to discovery.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The study of the interplay between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation and the consumption of gasoline may seem, at first glance, an odd pairing, much like mismatched socks in a laundry basket. Nevertheless, as we delve into the existing literature, we uncover intriguing insights that gradually unravel this unexpected alliance, much like an onion revealing its layers, or a mystery novel with an unexpectedly comical twist.

Smith, in "The Impact of Genetically Modified Crops on Agricultural Land Use" examines the effects of GMO cotton cultivation on land use in Texas. Their findings shed light on the potential ecological ramifications of GMO adoption, but one cannot help but wonder if this study, like a thrilling whodunit, only reveals part of the story, leaving us itching for more. Similarly, Doe, in the journal article "Biofuel Policies and Gasoline Consumption in Northern Europe," delves into the complexities of biofuel policies and their influence on gasoline consumption in Europe. The intricate dance between policy decisions and fuel consumption is indeed a tale worth pondering, much like a suspenseful political thriller with unexpected plot twists.

Turning to non-fiction works, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan offers a thought-provoking exploration of the food industry's impact on the environment, hinting at the complex web of interactions that extend beyond the dinner plate, not unlike our endeavors to untangle the connection between GMO cotton and gasoline. In a more whimsical vein, Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" leads readers on an intergalactic odyssey, reminding us that reality can be stranger than fiction, much like our own intrepid journey into the world of unconventional correlations.

Further expanding our literary purview, the fictional works of J.R.R. Tolkien transport us to fantastical realms, and though the connection to our research may seem as tenuous as Bilbo Baggins' threadbare pockets, one cannot deny the allure of unexpected connections, much like stumbling upon a long-lost treasure map in a dusty attic.

And finally, we come to the unlikeliest source of insight, the humble CVS receipt. As we pored over its mundane contents, we were struck by the overwhelming number of extraneous coupons for snack foods, leading us to ponder the potential correlation between GMO cotton production and the consumption of cheetos. While our curiosity remains unquenched in this matter, the realization dawned upon us: the world is full of surprises, and an open mind can lead to unexpected discoveries, much like finding a comedic gag hidden within a densely written research article.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Energy Information Administration . 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]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of scientific inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often arise from the most unexpected connections. The improbable affiliation between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in the vast fields of Texas and the tumultuous consumption of gasoline in the far reaches of Finland, though seemingly incongruent, has piqued the curiosity of researchers and academics alike. This unlikely nexus, while initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical expressions, has drawn our attention to the inherent interconnectedness of global phenomena and has, dare I say, fueled our enthusiasm for unearthing hidden patterns and relationships amidst the bewildering complexity of our world.
The intertwining of GMOs and gasoline, as unlikely bedfellows as they may seem, beckons us to embark on a journey of intellectual exploration and statistical scrutiny. By harnessing the formidable power of data, we aim to shed light on this curious coalescence, analyzing a dataset spanning over two decades with all the fervor and rigor that dedicated researchers are known for. As academics, we strive not only to unravel the mysteries that lie within the numbers but also to infuse our analysis with a dash of humor and levity, for a statistical undertaking need not be devoid of the occasional witticism and playful banter.
Statistical correlations, often the bread and butter of quantitative research, have led us down uncharted avenues of inquiry, unveiling surprising revelations and raising more than a few eyebrows. Our analysis, underpinned by a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 and a significance level that would make even the most hardened skeptics raise an intrigued eyebrow (p < 0.01), has thrust this unexpected alliance into the spotlight, demanding further investigation and prompting a few chuckles along the way.
As we delve into the labyrinthine world of GMOs and gasoline, we invite the reader to join us on a jovial yet intellectually stimulating expedition, where the journey is as enriching as the destination. With each regression analysis and scatter plot, we hope to not only elucidate the enigmatic connection between these two seemingly disparate variables but also sprinkle in a few statistical puns and whimsical observations for good measure. Let us unravel this scientific conundrum with a blend of scholarly rigor and lighthearted amusement, for in the realm of inquiry, as in life, a well-placed quip can illuminate the path to discovery.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic connection between GMO cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, our research team embarked on a methodological odyssey that was as rigorous as it was delightfully offbeat. Leveraging data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we devised a peculiar yet effective approach to unearthing the hidden relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables.

First, we meticulously collected and curated a treasure trove of data, spanning from 2000 to 2022, transforming raw statistics into meaningful insights with the skill and finesse of alchemists transmuting base metals into gold. A bit of statistical magic, if you will, infused with the fervor of dedicated researchers determined to leave no data point unturned.

With the proud swagger of scientists armed with a phalanx of spreadsheets and statistical software, we blissfully delved into the whimsical world of regression analysis, where variables dance, scatter plots wink mischievously, and correlation coefficients play a game of statistical hide-and-seek. Our methodology, though seemingly conventional on the surface, was flavored with a generous dollop of academic irreverence and a garnish of methodological mischief.

The heart of our inquiry lay in the unearthing of a robust correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton in Texas and the enigmatic consumption of gasoline in Finland. Guided by the beacon of statistical significance (p < 0.01), we navigated through the choppy waters of hypothesis testing with the buoyancy of intrepid explorers, uncovering unexpected patterns and hidden connections amidst the waves of data.

As disciples of probability and purveyors of p-values, we employed an array of statistical tests and diagnostics to rigorously examine the strength and validity of our findings. With a mischievous twinkle in our eyes, we prodded and scrutinized our data, ensuring that the statistical machinery hummed with precision and the findings remained steadfast under the critical gaze of academic scrutiny.

Embracing the spirit of scholarly inquiry and the occasional statistical pun, our methodology encapsulates not only the mechanical precision of data analysis but also the whimsical delight of uncovering unexpected correlations. This unorthodox yet rigorous approach, crafted with the artistry of unconventional thinkers, allows us to champion the deceptively serious pursuit of knowledge with a dash of scholarly mischief.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9771337, r-squared of 0.9547902, 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]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the realm of scientific inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often arise from the most unexpected connections. The improbable affiliation between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in the vast fields of Texas and the tumultuous consumption of gasoline in the far reaches of Finland, though seemingly incongruent, has piqued the curiosity of researchers and academics alike. This unlikely nexus, while initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical expressions, has drawn our attention to the inherent interconnectedness of global phenomena and has, dare I say, fueled our enthusiasm for unearthing hidden patterns and relationships amidst the bewildering complexity of our world.
The intertwining of GMOs and gasoline, as unlikely bedfellows as they may seem, beckons us to embark on a journey of intellectual exploration and statistical scrutiny. By harnessing the formidable power of data, we aim to shed light on this curious coalescence, analyzing a dataset spanning over two decades with all the fervor and rigor that dedicated researchers are known for. As academics, we strive not only to unravel the mysteries that lie within the numbers but also to infuse our analysis with a dash of humor and levity, for a statistical undertaking need not be devoid of the occasional witticism and playful banter.
Statistical correlations, often the bread and butter of quantitative research, have led us down uncharted avenues of inquiry, unveiling surprising revelations and raising more than a few eyebrows. Our analysis, underpinned by a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 and a significance level that would make even the most hardened skeptics raise an intrigued eyebrow (p < 0.01), has thrust this unexpected alliance into the spotlight, demanding further investigation and prompting a few chuckles along the way.
As we delve into the labyrinthine world of GMOs and gasoline, we invite the reader to join us on a jovial yet intellectually stimulating expedition, where the journey is as enriching as the destination. With each regression analysis and scatter plot, we hope to not only elucidate the enigmatic connection between these two seemingly disparate variables but also sprinkle in a few statistical puns and whimsical observations for good measure. Let us unravel this scientific conundrum with a blend of scholarly rigor and lighthearted amusement, for in the realm of inquiry, as in life, a well-placed quip can illuminate the path to discovery.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our investigation into the connection between GMO cotton production in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022 has yielded some rather unexpected, and dare I say, amusing findings. The statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337, indicating a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. With an r-squared value of 0.9547902 and a significance level of p < 0.01, the evidence for this curious connection is nothing short of compelling.

To visually encapsulate this surprising correlation, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that portrays the strong association between GMO cotton in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland. While the figure may not provide explicit comedic relief, we encourage readers to appreciate the unintentional humor in the juxtaposition of these two distinct elements in a single graph.

It is particularly noteworthy that these findings challenge conventional wisdom and beckon further exploration into the underlying mechanisms that link GMO cotton cultivation to the demand for gasoline in a far-flung Scandinavian country. This unlikely alliance between agricultural biotechnology and the energy needs of a distant nation is a testament to the often whimsical and capricious nature of statistical relationships.

In light of these results, we invite fellow academics, stat aficionados, and pun enthusiasts alike to join us in embracing the delightful unpredictability of our research findings, proving that even in the realm of scientific inquiry, there is always room for a bit of statistical serendipity.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The study of the interplay between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation and the consumption of gasoline may seem, at first glance, an odd pairing, much like mismatched socks in a laundry basket. Nevertheless, as we delve into the existing literature, we uncover intriguing insights that gradually unravel this unexpected alliance, much like an onion revealing its layers, or a mystery novel with an unexpectedly comical twist.
Smith, in "The Impact of Genetically Modified Crops on Agricultural Land Use" examines the effects of GMO cotton cultivation on land use in Texas. Their findings shed light on the potential ecological ramifications of GMO adoption, but one cannot help but wonder if this study, like a thrilling whodunit, only reveals part of the story, leaving us itching for more. Similarly, Doe, in the journal article "Biofuel Policies and Gasoline Consumption in Northern Europe," delves into the complexities of biofuel policies and their influence on gasoline consumption in Europe. The intricate dance between policy decisions and fuel consumption is indeed a tale worth pondering, much like a suspenseful political thriller with unexpected plot twists.
Turning to non-fiction works, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan offers a thought-provoking exploration of the food industry's impact on the environment, hinting at the complex web of interactions that extend beyond the dinner plate, not unlike our endeavors to untangle the connection between GMO cotton and gasoline. In a more whimsical vein, Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" leads readers on an intergalactic odyssey, reminding us that reality can be stranger than fiction, much like our own intrepid journey into the world of unconventional correlations.
Further expanding our literary purview, the fictional works of J.R.R. Tolkien transport us to fantastical realms, and though the connection to our research may seem as tenuous as Bilbo Baggins' threadbare pockets, one cannot deny the allure of unexpected connections, much like stumbling upon a long-lost treasure map in a dusty attic.
And finally, we come to the unlikeliest source of insight, the humble CVS receipt. As we pored over its mundane contents, we were struck by the overwhelming number of extraneous coupons for snack foods, leading us to ponder the potential correlation between GMO cotton production and the consumption of cheetos. While our curiosity remains unquenched in this matter, the realization dawned upon us: the world is full of surprises, and an open mind can lead to unexpected discoveries, much like finding a comedic gag hidden within a densely written research article.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the connection between GMO cotton production in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022 has yielded some rather unexpected, and dare I say, amusing findings. The statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337, indicating a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. With an r-squared value of 0.9547902 and a significance level of p < 0.01, the evidence for this curious connection is nothing short of compelling.
To visually encapsulate this surprising correlation, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that portrays the strong association between GMO cotton in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland. While the figure may not provide explicit comedic relief, we encourage readers to appreciate the unintentional humor in the juxtaposition of these two distinct elements in a single graph.
It is particularly noteworthy that these findings challenge conventional wisdom and beckon further exploration into the underlying mechanisms that link GMO cotton cultivation to the demand for gasoline in a far-flung Scandinavian country. This unlikely alliance between agricultural biotechnology and the energy needs of a distant nation is a testament to the often whimsical and capricious nature of statistical relationships.
In light of these results, we invite fellow academics, stat aficionados, and pun enthusiasts alike to join us in embracing the delightful unpredictability of our research findings, proving that even in the realm of scientific inquiry, there is always room for a bit of statistical serendipity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation uncovered a remarkably strong and statistically significant correlation between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland. This unexpected connection, akin to discovering a misplaced pen in the lab coat pocket, challenges traditional assumptions and underscores the intricacies of global interconnectivity, much like a complex network of gears in a comically oversized machine. The high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 and the compelling r-squared value of 0.9547902 not only support our hypothesis but also showcase the whimsical nature of statistical relationships, akin to finding a quirky Easter egg hidden within a densely written statistical analysis report.

Our findings echo earlier works discussing the ecological and economic impact of GMO adoption in cotton cultivation, essentially unveiling just enough of the plot to leave us yearning for a sequel, not unlike a gripping literary saga. Moreover, they align with the intricate dance between policy decisions and fuel consumption in Europe, showcasing an unexpected twist in the narrative, much like a surprise birthday party thrown for a Nobel laureate. These parallels highlight the capricious yet riveting nature of our research, resembling the humorous plot twists that pepper a Shakespearean comedy.

While our study delves into uncharted territory, much like a scientific protagonist on a daring expedition, the unexpected relationship between GMO cotton production in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland compels us to embrace the whimsical unpredictability of statistical analysis. In doing so, we invite fellow researchers to appreciate the lighthearted perspective we have injected into the often serious realm of academic discourse, bringing a touch of statistical serendipity to our collective 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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Gasoline pumped in Finland. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]:
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland

[[ABSTRACT]]:
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the realm of scientific inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often arise from the most unexpected connections. The improbable affiliation between genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in the vast fields of Texas and the tumultuous consumption of gasoline in the far reaches of Finland, though seemingly incongruent, has piqued the curiosity of researchers and academics alike. This unlikely nexus, while initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical expressions, has drawn our attention to the inherent interconnectedness of global phenomena and has, dare I say, fueled our enthusiasm for unearthing hidden patterns and relationships amidst the bewildering complexity of our world.
The intertwining of GMOs and gasoline, as unlikely bedfellows as they may seem, beckons us to embark on a journey of intellectual exploration and statistical scrutiny. By harnessing the formidable power of data, we aim to shed light on this curious coalescence, analyzing a dataset spanning over two decades with all the fervor and rigor that dedicated researchers are known for. As academics, we strive not only to unravel the mysteries that lie within the numbers but also to infuse our analysis with a dash of humor and levity, for a statistical undertaking need not be devoid of the occasional witticism and playful banter.
Statistical correlations, often the bread and butter of quantitative research, have led us down uncharted avenues of inquiry, unveiling surprising revelations and raising more than a few eyebrows. Our analysis, underpinned by a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 and a significance level that would make even the most hardened skeptics raise an intrigued eyebrow (p < 0.01), has thrust this unexpected alliance into the spotlight, demanding further investigation and prompting a few chuckles along the way.
As we delve into the labyrinthine world of GMOs and gasoline, we invite the reader to join us on a jovial yet intellectually stimulating expedition, where the journey is as enriching as the destination. With each regression analysis and scatter plot, we hope to not only elucidate the enigmatic connection between these two seemingly disparate variables but also sprinkle in a few statistical puns and whimsical observations for good measure. Let us unravel this scientific conundrum with a blend of scholarly rigor and lighthearted amusement, for in the realm of inquiry, as in life, a well-placed quip can illuminate the path to discovery.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the connection between GMO cotton production in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022 has yielded some rather unexpected, and dare I say, amusing findings. The statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337, indicating a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. With an r-squared value of 0.9547902 and a significance level of p < 0.01, the evidence for this curious connection is nothing short of compelling.
To visually encapsulate this surprising correlation, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that portrays the strong association between GMO cotton in Texas and gasoline consumption in Finland. While the figure may not provide explicit comedic relief, we encourage readers to appreciate the unintentional humor in the juxtaposition of these two distinct elements in a single graph.
It is particularly noteworthy that these findings challenge conventional wisdom and beckon further exploration into the underlying mechanisms that link GMO cotton cultivation to the demand for gasoline in a far-flung Scandinavian country. This unlikely alliance between agricultural biotechnology and the energy needs of a distant nation is a testament to the often whimsical and capricious nature of statistical relationships.
In light of these results, we invite fellow academics, stat aficionados, and pun enthusiasts alike to join us in embracing the delightful unpredictability of our research findings, proving that even in the realm of scientific inquiry, there is always room for a bit of statistical serendipity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the enigmatic entanglement of GMO cotton production in the Lone Star State and the voracious consumption of gasoline in the land of a thousand lakes has left us not only scratching our heads but also grinning wryly at the whims of statistical fate. Our investigation has unearthed a correlation so robust that it could power a fleet of genetically modified unicorns (if they existed, that is). The remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337, in all its statistical splendor, has defied the odds and reminded us that in the realm of research, truth can be stranger than fiction, and correlations can be mightier than a wind turbine in a cotton field.

While our findings may prompt a raised eyebrow or two, we cannot overlook the potential implications of this unexpected alliance. The intertwined dance of GMOs and gasoline has not only challenged the boundaries of conventional knowledge but also taught us that in the vast tapestry of data, there are more than a few threads of statistical humor and quirky quirkiness waiting to be unraveled.

As our study draws to a close, we are left with a twinkle in our eyes and a healthy appreciation for the delightful unpredictability of statistical exploration. We are tempted to say that further research in this area is as necessary as a fish riding a bicycle. But alas, in this case, we can confidently assert that no further research is needed in this particular avenue of inquiry. For as the saying goes, sometimes correlation truly does not imply causation.

So, let us bid adieu to our curious conundrum, for our dataset has spoken, and the statistical gods have shared their wisdom. In the words of the great statisticians before us, "May your p-values be low and your confidence intervals be high."


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 :
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Transcontinental Agro-Energy Studies


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 :
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Transcontinental Agricultural and Energy Research


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 :
Seed to Pump: An Unlikely Alliance between GMO Cotton in Texas and Gasoline in Finland with an abstract of :
This study investigates the surprising connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in cotton cultivation in Texas and the consumption of gasoline in Finland, two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from the USDA for cotton production in Texas and the Energy Information Administration for gasoline consumption in Finland from 2000 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive analysis. We uncover a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9771337 with a significance level of p < 0.01, suggesting a strong association between these disparate variables. We delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, untangling the underlying factors and their potential economic and environmental implications. Our findings challenge conventional wisdom and offer a lighthearted perspective on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our globalized world.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, Texas cotton production, GMO cotton cultivation, gasoline consumption, Finland, GMO crops, genetically modified organisms, correlation between cotton and gasoline, interconnectedness of agriculture and energy, globalized world, economic implications, environmental implications

*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

GMO use in cotton in Texas
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in Texas that is genetically modified to be herbicide-tolerant (HT), but not insect-resistant (Bt)
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton in Texas

Gasoline pumped in Finland
Detailed data title: Volume of gasoline pumped consumed in Finland in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Gasoline pumped in Finland

Correlation r = 0.9771337 (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 = 0.9547902 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 95.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Gasoline pumped in Finland) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Texas) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.3E-15. 0.0000000000000013327706222034
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 0.98 in 1.3E-13% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 750,316,658,651,098 random variables You don't actually need 750 trillion 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.

[ 0.95, 0.99 ] 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
GMO use in cotton in Texas (GMO cotton %)333540394035343631312719221715111113107877
Gasoline pumped in Finland (Million Barrels/Day)41.213141.876742.621942.87443.543.430143.106843.082240.688539.772638.939737.668536.483636.093234.980834.567134.215833.682233.367132.802730.729531.553429.7041




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 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([33,35,40,39,40,35,34,36,31,31,27,19,22,17,15,11,11,13,10,7,8,7,7,])
array_2 = np.array([41.2131,41.8767,42.6219,42.874,43.5,43.4301,43.1068,43.0822,40.6885,39.7726,38.9397,37.6685,36.4836,36.0932,34.9808,34.5671,34.2158,33.6822,33.3671,32.8027,30.7295,31.5534,29.7041,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in Texas"
array_2_name = "Gasoline pumped in Finland"

# 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?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!


Correlation ID: 3907 · Black Variable ID: 788 · Red Variable ID: 24416
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0