about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,257 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Austin and the second variable is Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

With cleaner air, squirrels in Austin are feeling more energized and peaceful, leading to a decrease in their aggressive behavior. It turns out, they were just really cranky because of all the pollution, and now they're not as eager to start squirrel fights. Remember, only you can prevent squirrel-on-human combat by keeping the air clean and the squirrels serene!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic cityscape in Austin, Texas. The skyline is shrouded in a hazy, polluted sky, and people are visible below, all wearing face masks. Some are seen looking at their smartphones, with expressions of worry, while others are gazing upwards, seemingly searching for something. In the midst of the bustling city, a squirrel is depicted in an aggressive stance, appearing to confront a person. The scene should capture the frantic atmosphere of people searching on their smartphones for "attacked by a squirrel" amidst the city's poor air quality and the strange encounter with the squirrel. 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: Poor air quality in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. 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: Minimalism Hyper-realistic Glitch art Cyber folk Futuristic
ChatGPT: Futuristic

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 Poor air quality in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel' together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Austin, a hazy sky looms over the city as people frantically search on their smartphones for "attacked by a squirrel," while wearing face masks to protect themselves from the poor air quality.

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: [ Futuristic ] and depicting this scene: In Austin, a hazy sky looms over the city as people frantically search on their smartphones for "attacked by a squirrel," while wearing face masks to protect themselves from the poor air quality. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic cityscape in Austin, Texas. The skyline is shrouded in a hazy, polluted sky, and people are visible below, all wearing face masks. Some are seen looking at their smartphones, with expressions of worry, while others are gazing upwards, seemingly searching for something. In the midst of the bustling city, a squirrel is depicted in an aggressive stance, appearing to confront a person. The scene should capture the frantic atmosphere of people searching on their smartphones for "attacked by a squirrel" amidst the city's poor air quality and the strange encounter with the squirrel.

*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 Air pollution in Austin caused attacked by a squirrel (Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel') to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

The Journal of Ecological Quirks

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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and p < 0.01 for 2004 to 2020.

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]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.


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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Air pollution is a serious issue that affects the health and well-being of individuals and communities. But who could have guessed that it might also impact people's search habits related to squirrel encounters? In this study, we delve into the curious correlation between air quality in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. It's a tale of nuts, pollution, and unexpected statistical connections.

Before diving headfirst into the quirky world of squirrel-related internet queries, it's important to establish the significance of air pollution as a public health concern. The impact of pollutants on respiratory and cardiovascular health has been extensively documented, and efforts to mitigate air pollution continue to be a priority for policymakers, environmental agencies, and conscientious citizens alike. It may seem like a stretch to connect this weighty topic to something as lighthearted as squirrels, but as we will demonstrate, the data tells a compelling story.

The intrigue begins with the realization that Austin, the vibrant capital of Texas, has experienced fluctuations in air quality over the years, influenced by a variety of factors such as traffic, industrial activities, and weather patterns. Meanwhile, Google Trends has been diligently capturing the collective curiosity of internet users, revealing the ebbs and flows of online searches for a wide array of topics – including, unexpectedly, encounters with our furry woodland friends. This juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated datasets sparks an intriguing question: could there be a connection between the two?

Through meticulous data analysis and statistical scrutiny, we have unearthed a surprising link between air pollution levels in Austin and the public's interest in the threat of potential squirrel skirmishes. Our findings not only illuminate the whimsical side of environmental influence but also demonstrate the surprising ways in which human behavior can reflect societal concerns about the environment – and perhaps a touch of squirrel-induced paranoia. So, let's embark on this eccentric journey and unearth the nuts and bolts of our findings on the squirrelly relationship between air quality and squirrel-related searches.


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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of 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 few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Air pollution is a serious issue that affects the health and well-being of individuals and communities. But who could have guessed that it might also impact people's search habits related to squirrel encounters? In this study, we delve into the curious correlation between air quality in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. It's a tale of nuts, pollution, and unexpected statistical connections.
Before diving headfirst into the quirky world of squirrel-related internet queries, it's important to establish the significance of air pollution as a public health concern. The impact of pollutants on respiratory and cardiovascular health has been extensively documented, and efforts to mitigate air pollution continue to be a priority for policymakers, environmental agencies, and conscientious citizens alike. It may seem like a stretch to connect this weighty topic to something as lighthearted as squirrels, but as we will demonstrate, the data tells a compelling story.
The intrigue begins with the realization that Austin, the vibrant capital of Texas, has experienced fluctuations in air quality over the years, influenced by a variety of factors such as traffic, industrial activities, and weather patterns. Meanwhile, Google Trends has been diligently capturing the collective curiosity of internet users, revealing the ebbs and flows of online searches for a wide array of topics – including, unexpectedly, encounters with our furry woodland friends. This juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated datasets sparks an intriguing question: could there be a connection between the two?
Through meticulous data analysis and statistical scrutiny, we have unearthed a surprising link between air pollution levels in Austin and the public's interest in the threat of potential squirrel skirmishes. Our findings not only illuminate the whimsical side of environmental influence but also demonstrate the surprising ways in which human behavior can reflect societal concerns about the environment – and perhaps a touch of squirrel-induced paranoia. So, let's embark on this eccentric journey and unearth the nuts and bolts of our findings on the squirrelly relationship between air quality and squirrel-related searches.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The existing body of literature on the impact of air pollution on human behavior is extensive, encompassing studies that analyze various aspects of public health, environmental policy, and societal responses. Smith et al. (2015) conducted a comprehensive review of air quality research, emphasizing the detrimental effects of pollution on respiratory ailments and cardiovascular diseases. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2017) examined the psychological repercussions of environmental degradation, shedding light on the intricate interplay between air pollution and mental health concerns. These foundational studies underscore the pervasive influence of air quality on human well-being, setting the stage for our investigation into the unorthodox correlation between air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'.

Expanding the scope to include unconventional cultural phenomena, our inquiry ventures into uncharted territory, merging environmental data with the whimsical realm of squirrel-related internet activity. As we transition from the realm of academic research to the broader spectrum of interdisciplinary insights, a delightful array of literature beckons. "Squirrels: An Ecological Perspective" (Brown, 2018) provides a scholarly examination of squirrel behavior and habitat preferences, offering a nuanced understanding of the furry protagonists in our research narrative. In a surprising twist, "The Secret Life of Squirrels" (Rose, 2014) delves into the fictitious yet endearing world of espionage among woodland creatures, inspiring a whimsical perspective on the dynamics of human-squirrel interactions.

Turning to the realm of popular entertainment that inadvertently enriches our scholarly pursuits, the authors draw upon firsthand research experiences involving television consumption. The investigative lens of "Untamed Urban Wildlife" (Discovery Channel, 2020) offers a captivating exploration of human-animal interfaces, serving as an unexpected source of inspiration for our study. Meanwhile, the endearing shenanigans of animated critters in "Squirrel Squad: Tales of Tails" (Cartoon Network, 2019) provide a lighthearted yet surprisingly relevant prism through which to ponder the quirks of squirrel behavior – and the human fascination with potential squirrel-related perils.

While the scholarly landscape has traditionally been characterized by gravity and sobriety, our foray into the enigmatic link between air pollution in Austin and the quest for squirrel safety exemplifies the whimsical potential that underpins physiological and environmental inquiries. As we embark on this scholarly escapade, rest assured that our findings will not only contribute to the empirical canon but also elevate the mirthful side of scholarly pursuits, reinforcing the notion that even in academia, a touch of whimsy can add a delightful flair to research endeavors.


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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2020

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]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Air pollution is a serious issue that affects the health and well-being of individuals and communities. But who could have guessed that it might also impact people's search habits related to squirrel encounters? In this study, we delve into the curious correlation between air quality in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. It's a tale of nuts, pollution, and unexpected statistical connections.
Before diving headfirst into the quirky world of squirrel-related internet queries, it's important to establish the significance of air pollution as a public health concern. The impact of pollutants on respiratory and cardiovascular health has been extensively documented, and efforts to mitigate air pollution continue to be a priority for policymakers, environmental agencies, and conscientious citizens alike. It may seem like a stretch to connect this weighty topic to something as lighthearted as squirrels, but as we will demonstrate, the data tells a compelling story.
The intrigue begins with the realization that Austin, the vibrant capital of Texas, has experienced fluctuations in air quality over the years, influenced by a variety of factors such as traffic, industrial activities, and weather patterns. Meanwhile, Google Trends has been diligently capturing the collective curiosity of internet users, revealing the ebbs and flows of online searches for a wide array of topics – including, unexpectedly, encounters with our furry woodland friends. This juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated datasets sparks an intriguing question: could there be a connection between the two?
Through meticulous data analysis and statistical scrutiny, we have unearthed a surprising link between air pollution levels in Austin and the public's interest in the threat of potential squirrel skirmishes. Our findings not only illuminate the whimsical side of environmental influence but also demonstrate the surprising ways in which human behavior can reflect societal concerns about the environment – and perhaps a touch of squirrel-induced paranoia. So, let's embark on this eccentric journey and unearth the nuts and bolts of our findings on the squirrelly relationship between air quality and squirrel-related searches.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unpack the enigmatic link between air pollution in Austin and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel', we embarked on a data-driven adventure blending environmental science with the whimsy of internet inquiries. Our intrepid team harnessed the power of digital archives and statistical wizardry to uncover the hidden connections among these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Data Collection:
We gathered air quality data from the Environmental Protection Agency's treasure trove of atmospheric insights. Parameters such as particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone levels were scrutinized with utmost seriousness, despite the occasional distraction from squirrel antics. Simultaneously, we delved deep into the archives of Google Trends, where the ebb and flow of 'attacked by a squirrel' searches revealed the pulse of public interest in unexpected rodent encounters. Our data treasure hunt spanned the years 2004 to 2020, capturing the evolution of both air quality and squirrel anxiety in the digital age.

Data Analysis:
In our valiant quest for statistical enlightenment, we employed a medley of analytical tools to unravel the peculiar intertwining of air pollution and squirrel-related cyber quests. A correlation analysis was our trusty compass, guiding us through the labyrinth of datasets to identify any meaningful connections. With the aid of sophisticated statistical software, we computed correlation coefficients and p-values, arming ourselves with empirical evidence to validate our findings amidst the idiosyncratic mix of air quality and squirrel capers.

Statistical Modeling:
To fortify our scholarly endeavors, we ventured into the realm of regression modeling, crafting complex equations to disentangle the web of associations between air pollutants and the public's fascination with squirrel skirmishes. In the spirit of intellectual whimsy, we also dabbled in curve fitting to illustrate the trajectory of squirrel-related searches in response to the environmental tides of Austin. Through these analytical acrobatics, we aimed to capture the essence of the squirrelly relationship in a statistical embrace.

Control Variables and Sensitivity Analysis:
In our pursuit of methodological rigor, we meticulously accounted for potential confounders, recognizing that the unpredictable nature of squirrel encounters may introduce variables beyond air pollution. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of our findings, ensuring that the squirrelly saga remained resilient amidst the statistical tumult.

Ethical Considerations:
While our journey through the realms of air pollution and squirrel obsessions exuded a spirit of lighthearted inquiry, we remained steadfast in our commitment to ethical research conduct. The integrity of data sources and the ethical implications of our findings were paramount in our scholarly escapade, proving that even in the whimsical world of squirrel research, academic integrity stands unwavering.

In summary, our methodology melded the rigor of environmental data analysis with the sprightly allure of internet trends, offering a zesty blend of scientific exactitude and digital drollery in our quest to unravel the uncanny relationship between air pollution and squirrel-themed searches.


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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends .

For the time period 2004 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8371629, r-squared of 0.7008417, 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]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Air pollution is a serious issue that affects the health and well-being of individuals and communities. But who could have guessed that it might also impact people's search habits related to squirrel encounters? In this study, we delve into the curious correlation between air quality in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. It's a tale of nuts, pollution, and unexpected statistical connections.
Before diving headfirst into the quirky world of squirrel-related internet queries, it's important to establish the significance of air pollution as a public health concern. The impact of pollutants on respiratory and cardiovascular health has been extensively documented, and efforts to mitigate air pollution continue to be a priority for policymakers, environmental agencies, and conscientious citizens alike. It may seem like a stretch to connect this weighty topic to something as lighthearted as squirrels, but as we will demonstrate, the data tells a compelling story.
The intrigue begins with the realization that Austin, the vibrant capital of Texas, has experienced fluctuations in air quality over the years, influenced by a variety of factors such as traffic, industrial activities, and weather patterns. Meanwhile, Google Trends has been diligently capturing the collective curiosity of internet users, revealing the ebbs and flows of online searches for a wide array of topics – including, unexpectedly, encounters with our furry woodland friends. This juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated datasets sparks an intriguing question: could there be a connection between the two?
Through meticulous data analysis and statistical scrutiny, we have unearthed a surprising link between air pollution levels in Austin and the public's interest in the threat of potential squirrel skirmishes. Our findings not only illuminate the whimsical side of environmental influence but also demonstrate the surprising ways in which human behavior can reflect societal concerns about the environment – and perhaps a touch of squirrel-induced paranoia. So, let's embark on this eccentric journey and unearth the nuts and bolts of our findings on the squirrelly relationship between air quality and squirrel-related searches.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8371629, indicating a robust positive relationship between air pollution levels in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. This finding suggests that as air pollution increases, so does the public's seemingly heightened interest in potential squirrel attacks. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7008417 further emphasizes the strength of this relationship, explaining approximately 70.08% of the variation in squirrel-related search activity based on air pollution levels.

The p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis, indicating that the association observed is unlikely to be due to chance alone. These results underscore the substantive and statistically significant link between these seemingly disparate phenomena, shedding light on the quirky intertwining of environmental factors and public interest in squirrel encounters.

Furthermore, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually portrays the strong positive relationship between air pollution levels and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel', affirming the robust statistical correlation uncovered in this study.

In summary, our analysis reveals a compelling and unexpected correlation between air quality in Austin and public curiosity about squirrel-related mishaps. These findings not only contribute an intriguing quirk to the realm of air quality research but also underscore the multifaceted ways in which environmental influences can permeate public consciousness – even in the form of squirrel search queries.


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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of 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]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The existing body of literature on the impact of air pollution on human behavior is extensive, encompassing studies that analyze various aspects of public health, environmental policy, and societal responses. Smith et al. (2015) conducted a comprehensive review of air quality research, emphasizing the detrimental effects of pollution on respiratory ailments and cardiovascular diseases. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2017) examined the psychological repercussions of environmental degradation, shedding light on the intricate interplay between air pollution and mental health concerns. These foundational studies underscore the pervasive influence of air quality on human well-being, setting the stage for our investigation into the unorthodox correlation between air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'.
Expanding the scope to include unconventional cultural phenomena, our inquiry ventures into uncharted territory, merging environmental data with the whimsical realm of squirrel-related internet activity. As we transition from the realm of academic research to the broader spectrum of interdisciplinary insights, a delightful array of literature beckons. "Squirrels: An Ecological Perspective" (Brown, 2018) provides a scholarly examination of squirrel behavior and habitat preferences, offering a nuanced understanding of the furry protagonists in our research narrative. In a surprising twist, "The Secret Life of Squirrels" (Rose, 2014) delves into the fictitious yet endearing world of espionage among woodland creatures, inspiring a whimsical perspective on the dynamics of human-squirrel interactions.
Turning to the realm of popular entertainment that inadvertently enriches our scholarly pursuits, the authors draw upon firsthand research experiences involving television consumption. The investigative lens of "Untamed Urban Wildlife" (Discovery Channel, 2020) offers a captivating exploration of human-animal interfaces, serving as an unexpected source of inspiration for our study. Meanwhile, the endearing shenanigans of animated critters in "Squirrel Squad: Tales of Tails" (Cartoon Network, 2019) provide a lighthearted yet surprisingly relevant prism through which to ponder the quirks of squirrel behavior – and the human fascination with potential squirrel-related perils.
While the scholarly landscape has traditionally been characterized by gravity and sobriety, our foray into the enigmatic link between air pollution in Austin and the quest for squirrel safety exemplifies the whimsical potential that underpins physiological and environmental inquiries. As we embark on this scholarly escapade, rest assured that our findings will not only contribute to the empirical canon but also elevate the mirthful side of scholarly pursuits, reinforcing the notion that even in academia, a touch of whimsy can add a delightful flair to research endeavors.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8371629, indicating a robust positive relationship between air pollution levels in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. This finding suggests that as air pollution increases, so does the public's seemingly heightened interest in potential squirrel attacks. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7008417 further emphasizes the strength of this relationship, explaining approximately 70.08% of the variation in squirrel-related search activity based on air pollution levels.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis, indicating that the association observed is unlikely to be due to chance alone. These results underscore the substantive and statistically significant link between these seemingly disparate phenomena, shedding light on the quirky intertwining of environmental factors and public interest in squirrel encounters.
Furthermore, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually portrays the strong positive relationship between air pollution levels and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel', affirming the robust statistical correlation uncovered in this study.
In summary, our analysis reveals a compelling and unexpected correlation between air quality in Austin and public curiosity about squirrel-related mishaps. These findings not only contribute an intriguing quirk to the realm of air quality research but also underscore the multifaceted ways in which environmental influences can permeate public consciousness – even in the form of squirrel search queries.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings unveiled an unexpected and enthralling connective tissue between air pollution in Austin and the public's quest for information regarding potential squirrel skirmishes. While this correlation may seem downright nutty at first glance, it resonates with the growing body of literature on the pervasive impact of environmental factors on human behavior.

As harkened back to in our literature review, Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2017) set the stage by highlighting the far-reaching effects of air pollution on human health and well-being. Our results align with these previous studies, demonstrating that environmental degradation transcends conventional health outcomes to permeate even the quirkier facets of public interest. In other words, it appears that as the air quality in Austin declines, so does the public's patience for squirrel-related shenanigans, leading to an uptick in the virtual quest for squirrel-related safety tips.

How can we explain this peculiar correlation? Could it be that increased air pollution leads to a decline in real estate value for our furry friends, driving them to stage more daring forays into urban areas and thus contributing to public concern? Or perhaps the public, under the influence of air pollution-induced stress, seeks solace in the endearing antics of woodland creatures, leading to a surge in online squirrel-related inquiries. Regardless of the underlying mechanism, our results highlight the need to expand the canvas of air quality research to encompass the whimsical yet tangible ways in which environmental factors can leave an indelible mark on human behavior.

At first blush, our foray into the quirky realm of squirrel-related internet activity may appear lighthearted, but the resilience of our statistical findings and their alignment with previous air quality research emphasize the significance of this investigation. Our study adds a dash of levity to the serious field of environmental research, reminding us that amidst the complexities of statistical analysis and scholarly pursuits, there is always space for unexpected yet impactful insights.

In the grand scheme of academic inquiry, this study provokes a smile while illuminating the multifaceted ways in which environmental influences can shape human curiosity, prompting us to stay alert for the unexpected – including an increased interest in squirrel-related escapades.


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 Air pollution in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Make lots of 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]]
Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Air pollution is a serious issue that affects the health and well-being of individuals and communities. But who could have guessed that it might also impact people's search habits related to squirrel encounters? In this study, we delve into the curious correlation between air quality in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. It's a tale of nuts, pollution, and unexpected statistical connections.
Before diving headfirst into the quirky world of squirrel-related internet queries, it's important to establish the significance of air pollution as a public health concern. The impact of pollutants on respiratory and cardiovascular health has been extensively documented, and efforts to mitigate air pollution continue to be a priority for policymakers, environmental agencies, and conscientious citizens alike. It may seem like a stretch to connect this weighty topic to something as lighthearted as squirrels, but as we will demonstrate, the data tells a compelling story.
The intrigue begins with the realization that Austin, the vibrant capital of Texas, has experienced fluctuations in air quality over the years, influenced by a variety of factors such as traffic, industrial activities, and weather patterns. Meanwhile, Google Trends has been diligently capturing the collective curiosity of internet users, revealing the ebbs and flows of online searches for a wide array of topics – including, unexpectedly, encounters with our furry woodland friends. This juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated datasets sparks an intriguing question: could there be a connection between the two?
Through meticulous data analysis and statistical scrutiny, we have unearthed a surprising link between air pollution levels in Austin and the public's interest in the threat of potential squirrel skirmishes. Our findings not only illuminate the whimsical side of environmental influence but also demonstrate the surprising ways in which human behavior can reflect societal concerns about the environment – and perhaps a touch of squirrel-induced paranoia. So, let's embark on this eccentric journey and unearth the nuts and bolts of our findings on the squirrelly relationship between air quality and squirrel-related searches.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8371629, indicating a robust positive relationship between air pollution levels in Austin and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. This finding suggests that as air pollution increases, so does the public's seemingly heightened interest in potential squirrel attacks. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7008417 further emphasizes the strength of this relationship, explaining approximately 70.08% of the variation in squirrel-related search activity based on air pollution levels.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis, indicating that the association observed is unlikely to be due to chance alone. These results underscore the substantive and statistically significant link between these seemingly disparate phenomena, shedding light on the quirky intertwining of environmental factors and public interest in squirrel encounters.
Furthermore, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually portrays the strong positive relationship between air pollution levels and Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel', affirming the robust statistical correlation uncovered in this study.
In summary, our analysis reveals a compelling and unexpected correlation between air quality in Austin and public curiosity about squirrel-related mishaps. These findings not only contribute an intriguing quirk to the realm of air quality research but also underscore the multifaceted ways in which environmental influences can permeate public consciousness – even in the form of squirrel search queries.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, this study has shed light on the squirrelly relationship between air pollution in Austin and the public's intriguing, perhaps perplexing, interest in potential squirrel skirmishes. Our findings unveil a statistically robust association, leaving us pondering whether there's a whiff of squirrel-induced paranoia in the air alongside pollutants.

The implications of this study extend beyond a simple statistical correlation. They invite us to contemplate the whimsical ways in which environmental factors can intertwine with public curiosity. Perhaps the next time we take a deep breath of air in Austin, we should also glance around for acorns and bushy-tailed onlookers.

While our results may prompt a chuckle or two, they also underscore the importance of considering unexpected societal responses to environmental conditions. It seems that the impact of air pollution reaches beyond respiratory health, making for an unexpected story of squirrel-related internet queries.

As we put the finishing touches on this eccentric journey, we assert that no further research in this area is needed. The correlation is strong, the puns have been plentiful, and we've uncovered a statistical tale that will surely be retold at academic gatherings for years to come.


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 Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Ecological Quirks


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 Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel'. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Environmental Squirrel 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 Nuts About Pollution: The Squirrelly Relationship Between Air Quality in Austin and Google Searches for 'Attacked by a Squirrel' with an abstract of This study delves into the unexpected and quirky connection between air pollution in Austin, Texas, and the frequency of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we set out to investigate whether there is a statistical link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. We found a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8371629 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years 2004 to 2020, suggesting a robust association between air pollution levels and the public's concern about squirrel attacks. Our findings not only provide a significant contribution to understanding the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also add a whimsical twist to the field of air quality research. This study proves that when it comes to the effects of air pollution, you should always keep an eye out for the unexpected - and that includes an increased interest in squirrel-related mishaps.

ChatGPT:

"Nuts and air pollution correlation", "Google searches for attacked by a squirrel", "Air pollution in Austin and human behavior", "Effects of air pollution on public concern about squirrel attacks", "Environmental impact on Google search trends", "Squirrel-related mishaps and air quality".

*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

Air pollution in Austin
Detailed data title: Percentage of days 'unhealthy' or worse air quality in Austin-Round Rock, TX
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Austin

Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'

Correlation r = 0.8371629 (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 = 0.7008417 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 70.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Austin) over the 17 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.8E-5. 0.0000277172637378640900000000
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 0.84 in 0.0028% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 36,079 random variables You don't actually need 36 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. 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.

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 16 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 16 because we have two variables measured over a period of 17 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.

[ 0.6, 0.94 ] 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.
20042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020
Air pollution in Austin (Bad air quality days)0.5464480.8219181.095890.2739730000.2739730.54644800000000.273224
Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel' (Rel. search volume)12.251211.752.4166703.333334.752.54.333333.9166720.9166672.583330.750.4166671.166671.41667




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.




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([0.546448,0.821918,1.09589,0.273973,0,0,0,0.273973,0.546448,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.273224,])
array_2 = np.array([12.25,12,11.75,2.41667,0,3.33333,4.75,2.5,4.33333,3.91667,2,0.916667,2.58333,0.75,0.416667,1.16667,1.41667,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Austin"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'attacked by a squirrel'"

# 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?

Kudos for rating!


Correlation ID: 2257 · Black Variable ID: 20309 · Red Variable ID: 1354
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0