about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,602 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Eddy and the second variable is GMO use in cotton in Missouri.  The chart goes from 2005 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the popularity of the name Eddy declined, there were fewer individuals with a penchant for stylish but genetically modified cotton clothing. This led to a decreased demand for GMO cotton in Missouri, prompting a shift towards more sustainable and Eddy-torially approved fashion choices.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie: In a sun-kissed Missouri cotton field, a young boy named Eddy exudes joy as he skips through the thriving plants. The cotton field is a patchwork of lush greens and puffy white, with the boy's playful laughter echoing through the air. Surrounding the scene, the proud parents stand with content smiles, gazing at their son with a sense of fulfillment as the golden light of the setting sun bathes the entire setting in a warm, magical glow. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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: Brutalism A scene from Skyrim Cyberpunk Scalar art An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri, in the following situation: Parents who named their child Eddy were subliminally influenced by the "Eddy currents" in physics, which sparked an interest in the environmental impact of cotton production. This prompted them to advocate for GMO use in cotton to reduce the need for harmful pesticides, ultimately leading to an increase in GMO cotton production in Missouri.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Missouri cotton field, a little boy named Eddy plays, surrounded by towering cotton plants. The fields are thriving due to the use of GMOs, which have reduced the need for harmful pesticides. Eddy's parents, known advocates for GMO use in cotton, proudly watch as their son happily runs through the fields, his name a nod to their interest in physics and environmental impact. The popularity of the name Eddy reflects the growing awareness of sustainable cotton production in the region.

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 A Disney Movie ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Missouri cotton field, a little boy named Eddy plays, surrounded by towering cotton plants. The fields are thriving due to the use of GMOs, which have reduced the need for harmful pesticides. Eddy's parents, known advocates for GMO use in cotton, proudly watch as their son happily runs through the fields, his name a nod to their interest in physics and environmental impact. The popularity of the name Eddy reflects the growing awareness of sustainable cotton production in the region. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie: In a sun-kissed Missouri cotton field, a young boy named Eddy exudes joy as he skips through the thriving plants. The cotton field is a patchwork of lush greens and puffy white, with the boy's playful laughter echoing through the air. Surrounding the scene, the proud parents stand with content smiles, gazing at their son with a sense of fulfillment as the golden light of the setting sun bathes the entire setting in a warm, magical glow.

*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 Popularity of the first name Eddy caused GMO use in cotton in Missouri to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State

The Journal of Agro Eddy Dynamics

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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 US Social Security Administration and USDA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 and p < 0.01 for 2005 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As the world turns and spins through the cotton fields of life, the blossoming world of agricultural research continues to yield new insights into the relationship between human quirks and farming practices. In this age of data analysis and discovery, the unexpected connections between seemingly unrelated variables often take researchers by surprise, much like a forgotten cotton ball left in a pocket before laundry day—turning up in the most unexpected places.

The realm of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has long been a hotbed of debate and speculation, but it seems that amid the rows of cotton in Missouri, a different kind of buzz has emerged. That's right, it's the "Eddy" effect—a phenomenon where individuals bearing the name "Eddy" may unknowingly be influencing the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. Who would have thought that this prolific first name could be entangled in the fabric of agricultural practices?

Now, before we get tangled in a web of puns and cotton-related wordplay, let's address the proverbial elephant in the room—why on earth would we even consider examining the link between a first name and GMO use in cotton? The answer, my dear readers, lies in the subtle art of statistical analysis and the curiosity that fuels scientific inquiry. As researchers, it's our duty to explore the hidden patterns that defy conventional wisdom, even if it means straying into the more offbeat corridors of research.

So, saddle up and prepare to delve into the world of "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" as we unravel the enigma of how an innocent name could potentially steer the course of agricultural innovation. As our findings reveal, there's more to this peculiar novelty than meets the eye, and perhaps a few giggles along the way.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the world turns and spins through the cotton fields of life, the blossoming world of agricultural research continues to yield new insights into the relationship between human quirks and farming practices. In this age of data analysis and discovery, the unexpected connections between seemingly unrelated variables often take researchers by surprise, much like a forgotten cotton ball left in a pocket before laundry day—turning up in the most unexpected places.
The realm of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has long been a hotbed of debate and speculation, but it seems that amid the rows of cotton in Missouri, a different kind of buzz has emerged. That's right, it's the "Eddy" effect—a phenomenon where individuals bearing the name "Eddy" may unknowingly be influencing the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. Who would have thought that this prolific first name could be entangled in the fabric of agricultural practices?
Now, before we get tangled in a web of puns and cotton-related wordplay, let's address the proverbial elephant in the room—why on earth would we even consider examining the link between a first name and GMO use in cotton? The answer, my dear readers, lies in the subtle art of statistical analysis and the curiosity that fuels scientific inquiry. As researchers, it's our duty to explore the hidden patterns that defy conventional wisdom, even if it means straying into the more offbeat corridors of research.
So, saddle up and prepare to delve into the world of "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" as we unravel the enigma of how an innocent name could potentially steer the course of agricultural innovation. As our findings reveal, there's more to this peculiar novelty than meets the eye, and perhaps a few giggles along the way.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The first semblance of tangential association between a person's name and agricultural practices began with the seminal work of Smith et al. in the groundbreaking study "Human Names and Agricultural Anomalies: Unearthing the Unlikely Correlations." Smith et al. embarked on a quest to scrutinize the influence of personal nomenclature on agricultural decision-making, uncovering subtle, almost imperceptible connections that dance under the radar of conventional wisdom.

Doe and Jones, in their foundational piece "Monikers and Monsanto: The Untold Story," delved further into the intricate web of relationships between first names and agricultural technologies. Their findings not only provided empirical evidence but also sowed the seeds of curiosity regarding the uncharted territories of cultural quirks and their influence on farming practices.

Turning to non-fiction works, relevant literature on genetic modification and agricultural practices includes "GMOs in the Heartland" by Laura Carter, "Cotton Chronicles: From Farms to Fashion" by Marianne Meadows, and "The Agricultural Alphabet: A Synthesis of Soil and Surnames" by Frederick Fischer. These works, while not directly addressing the correlation between first names and GMO cotton in Missouri, offer valuable insights into the broader context of agricultural innovation and sociocultural influences.

In the realm of fiction, the likes of "Name of the Cotton" by Harper Lee, "The Secret Life of Eddys" by Stephanie Danler, and "The Cotton Conspiracy" by Dan Brown offer fictional narratives entwined with threads of agricultural intrigue, albeit in a manner unrelated to our research focus.

Delving deeper into the abyss of literature, the authors conducted a thorough examination of unconventional sources, including but not limited to fortune cookies, highway billboards, and even the disheveled CVS receipts that line the trash cans of our research facility. While these unconventional sources provided no empirical evidence, they did offer a plethora of comedic relief and the occasional cryptic message to ponder upon.

As we embark on this literary escapade, it becomes increasingly clear that uncovering the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Eddy" and GMO use in cotton in Missouri is not only a scholarly pursuit but an expedition into the whimsical and unexpected corridors of research. And so, with a dash of humor and a pinch of scholarly rigor, we pave the way for a journey through the unraveling of this enigmatic correlation.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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 US Social Security Administration and USDA . You used data from 2005 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the world turns and spins through the cotton fields of life, the blossoming world of agricultural research continues to yield new insights into the relationship between human quirks and farming practices. In this age of data analysis and discovery, the unexpected connections between seemingly unrelated variables often take researchers by surprise, much like a forgotten cotton ball left in a pocket before laundry day—turning up in the most unexpected places.
The realm of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has long been a hotbed of debate and speculation, but it seems that amid the rows of cotton in Missouri, a different kind of buzz has emerged. That's right, it's the "Eddy" effect—a phenomenon where individuals bearing the name "Eddy" may unknowingly be influencing the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. Who would have thought that this prolific first name could be entangled in the fabric of agricultural practices?
Now, before we get tangled in a web of puns and cotton-related wordplay, let's address the proverbial elephant in the room—why on earth would we even consider examining the link between a first name and GMO use in cotton? The answer, my dear readers, lies in the subtle art of statistical analysis and the curiosity that fuels scientific inquiry. As researchers, it's our duty to explore the hidden patterns that defy conventional wisdom, even if it means straying into the more offbeat corridors of research.
So, saddle up and prepare to delve into the world of "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" as we unravel the enigma of how an innocent name could potentially steer the course of agricultural innovation. As our findings reveal, there's more to this peculiar novelty than meets the eye, and perhaps a few giggles along the way.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unweave the intricate tapestry of the "Eddy" effect on GMO cotton in Missouri, we employed a multifaceted methodology that would make even the most seasoned statistician raise an eyebrow. Our initial step involved the meticulous extraction of data from the United States Social Security Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, serving as our primary sources of information. This process, much like untangling a particularly knotty ball of yarn, necessitated the compilation of Eddy-related birth records from 2005 to 2022, as well as comprehensive data on GMO cotton cultivation in the cotton fields of the Show-Me State.

Drawing inspiration from the scientific greats who transversed uncharted territory, we embarked on a journey through the ever-expanding universe of datasets, navigating the labyrinth of algorithms with the tenacity of a cotton seed determined to take root. After rounding up the requisite data, we harnessed the statistical power of correlation analysis, seeking to establish the strength and direction of the relationship between Eddy popularity and GMO cotton use.

With the gusto of an explorer charting new horizons, we leveraged advanced statistical software to wrangle the numbers, carefully calibrating our calculations to ensure precision, much like a skilled seamstress ensuring every stitch is just right. The Pearson correlation coefficient emerged as our trusty guide, leading us through the tangled vines of data patterns and anomalies, while the p-value stood as the gatekeeper, allowing us to discern the significance of the observed relationship.

In parallel, we conducted a robust time series analysis to trace the fluctuating trends of Eddy popularity and GMO cotton adoption over the years, unravelling the fabric of temporal dynamics with the curiosity of a historian peering through the annals of time. This allowed us to uncover any long-term patterns or cyclical nuances that might elucidate the enigmatic connection between a name and agricultural innovation.

Moreover, in a bid to scrutinize the possible causality underlying the observed correlation, we complemented our primary analyses with regression models, teasing out the potential influence of confounding variables while recognizing the multitude of intricate threads woven into the fabric of our research question.

Thus, armed with an arsenal of statistical tools and the spirit of intrepid inquiry, we fine-tuned our research lens to illuminate the complex interplay between Eddy and GMO cotton, endeavoring to capture the essence of this unforeseen nexus with scholarly rigor and a sprinkle of scientific whimsy.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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 US Social Security Administration and USDA .

For the time period 2005 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7903191, r-squared of 0.6246044, 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As the world turns and spins through the cotton fields of life, the blossoming world of agricultural research continues to yield new insights into the relationship between human quirks and farming practices. In this age of data analysis and discovery, the unexpected connections between seemingly unrelated variables often take researchers by surprise, much like a forgotten cotton ball left in a pocket before laundry day—turning up in the most unexpected places.
The realm of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has long been a hotbed of debate and speculation, but it seems that amid the rows of cotton in Missouri, a different kind of buzz has emerged. That's right, it's the "Eddy" effect—a phenomenon where individuals bearing the name "Eddy" may unknowingly be influencing the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. Who would have thought that this prolific first name could be entangled in the fabric of agricultural practices?
Now, before we get tangled in a web of puns and cotton-related wordplay, let's address the proverbial elephant in the room—why on earth would we even consider examining the link between a first name and GMO use in cotton? The answer, my dear readers, lies in the subtle art of statistical analysis and the curiosity that fuels scientific inquiry. As researchers, it's our duty to explore the hidden patterns that defy conventional wisdom, even if it means straying into the more offbeat corridors of research.
So, saddle up and prepare to delve into the world of "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" as we unravel the enigma of how an innocent name could potentially steer the course of agricultural innovation. As our findings reveal, there's more to this peculiar novelty than meets the eye, and perhaps a few giggles along the way.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri over the period from 2005 to 2022. This correlation suggests a strong positive relationship between the two variables, prompting further investigation into the unexpected and, dare I say, "Eddy-fying" influence on agricultural practices.

The coefficient of determination (r-squared) was found to be 0.6246044, indicating that approximately 62.46% of the variability in GMO cotton use can be explained by the variation in the popularity of the name "Eddy." In statistical terms, this is a substantial portion of variance accounted for, leaving only a modest amount of unexplained variability in the data, like that one cotton seed that always seems to escape into the washing machine lint trap.

Moreover, the p-value obtained from the analysis was less than 0.01, suggesting that the correlation observed is statistically significant. In other words, the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation by mere chance is as rare as stumbling upon a purple cotton plant in the heart of Missouri—a statistical oddity indeed!

As a visual representation of our findings, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) vividly illustrates the robust correlation between the prevalence of the name "Eddy" and the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. It's almost as visually striking as a field of genetically modified cotton bolls, but don't worry, we won't be spinning any tall tales about GMO cotton unicorns - we'll leave that to the folklore researchers.

These results not only highlight the statistically significant relationship between the popularity of the first name "Eddy" and GMO use in cotton but also lend themselves to intriguing interpretations and pun-tential avenues for further investigation. The "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" phenomenon may seem like a quirky coincidence, but the data don't lie—there's a real thread of connection between the name "Eddy" and the cultivation of genetically modified cotton in the Show-Me State. And as researchers, we're always ready to unravel the unexpected mysteries that lend a touch of humor to our scientific pursuits.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The first semblance of tangential association between a person's name and agricultural practices began with the seminal work of Smith et al. in the groundbreaking study "Human Names and Agricultural Anomalies: Unearthing the Unlikely Correlations." Smith et al. embarked on a quest to scrutinize the influence of personal nomenclature on agricultural decision-making, uncovering subtle, almost imperceptible connections that dance under the radar of conventional wisdom.
Doe and Jones, in their foundational piece "Monikers and Monsanto: The Untold Story," delved further into the intricate web of relationships between first names and agricultural technologies. Their findings not only provided empirical evidence but also sowed the seeds of curiosity regarding the uncharted territories of cultural quirks and their influence on farming practices.
Turning to non-fiction works, relevant literature on genetic modification and agricultural practices includes "GMOs in the Heartland" by Laura Carter, "Cotton Chronicles: From Farms to Fashion" by Marianne Meadows, and "The Agricultural Alphabet: A Synthesis of Soil and Surnames" by Frederick Fischer. These works, while not directly addressing the correlation between first names and GMO cotton in Missouri, offer valuable insights into the broader context of agricultural innovation and sociocultural influences.
In the realm of fiction, the likes of "Name of the Cotton" by Harper Lee, "The Secret Life of Eddys" by Stephanie Danler, and "The Cotton Conspiracy" by Dan Brown offer fictional narratives entwined with threads of agricultural intrigue, albeit in a manner unrelated to our research focus.
Delving deeper into the abyss of literature, the authors conducted a thorough examination of unconventional sources, including but not limited to fortune cookies, highway billboards, and even the disheveled CVS receipts that line the trash cans of our research facility. While these unconventional sources provided no empirical evidence, they did offer a plethora of comedic relief and the occasional cryptic message to ponder upon.
As we embark on this literary escapade, it becomes increasingly clear that uncovering the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Eddy" and GMO use in cotton in Missouri is not only a scholarly pursuit but an expedition into the whimsical and unexpected corridors of research. And so, with a dash of humor and a pinch of scholarly rigor, we pave the way for a journey through the unraveling of this enigmatic correlation.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri over the period from 2005 to 2022. This correlation suggests a strong positive relationship between the two variables, prompting further investigation into the unexpected and, dare I say, "Eddy-fying" influence on agricultural practices.
The coefficient of determination (r-squared) was found to be 0.6246044, indicating that approximately 62.46% of the variability in GMO cotton use can be explained by the variation in the popularity of the name "Eddy." In statistical terms, this is a substantial portion of variance accounted for, leaving only a modest amount of unexplained variability in the data, like that one cotton seed that always seems to escape into the washing machine lint trap.
Moreover, the p-value obtained from the analysis was less than 0.01, suggesting that the correlation observed is statistically significant. In other words, the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation by mere chance is as rare as stumbling upon a purple cotton plant in the heart of Missouri—a statistical oddity indeed!
As a visual representation of our findings, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) vividly illustrates the robust correlation between the prevalence of the name "Eddy" and the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. It's almost as visually striking as a field of genetically modified cotton bolls, but don't worry, we won't be spinning any tall tales about GMO cotton unicorns - we'll leave that to the folklore researchers.
These results not only highlight the statistically significant relationship between the popularity of the first name "Eddy" and GMO use in cotton but also lend themselves to intriguing interpretations and pun-tential avenues for further investigation. The "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" phenomenon may seem like a quirky coincidence, but the data don't lie—there's a real thread of connection between the name "Eddy" and the cultivation of genetically modified cotton in the Show-Me State. And as researchers, we're always ready to unravel the unexpected mysteries that lend a touch of humor to our scientific pursuits.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

The results of our study make for a riveting yarn, weaving the strands of statistical evidence and a touch of whimsy. As we tread through the unexpected terrain of Eddys and GMO cotton, it becomes apparent that the correlation between the popularity of the moniker "Eddy" and the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Missouri is not just a cotton-pickin' curiosity but a substantial finding.

The strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 between the prevalence of the name "Eddy" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Missouri reaffirms the trailblazing groundwork laid by prior studies. Smith et al.'s work, which likely raised many eyebrows with its intimation of a correlation between personal names and agricultural decisions, could now be viewed through a fresh lens, figuratively harvesting the fruits of their labor. Doe and Jones' revelations about the subtle interactions between first names and agricultural technologies seem less fanciful in light of our own findings, perhaps prompting them to indulge in an "I told you so" moment.

The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.6246044 serves as the statistical squash to any doubts about the substantive relationship between the variables. Almost two-thirds of the variability in GMO cotton use can be elucidated by the popularity of the name "Eddy." This quantitatively-driven observation carries more weight than the pile of cotton balls at a textile trade show.

Moreover, the p-value less than 0.01 signals that the observed correlation is no statistical fluke—it's as rare as finding a double-headed cotton boll, a find that would indeed spin tales of wonder. Our findings, portrayed in the scatterplot, echo the visual grandeur of a genetically modified cotton field, a sight not unlike a painter's canvas of statistical significance.

The implications of these results, alongside the quirky trail of investigation, deliver a blend of head-scratching oddities and a rib-tickling narrative. The "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" phenomenon may seem like a coincidence, but it's as real as a bale of cotton on a farm. This uncovering invites further inquisitive strides into the intersection of nomenclature and agricultural practices, where statistical significance is as common as a two-headed calf in a scientific parade. Our findings lend credence to the undeniable link between the name "Eddy" and the cultivation of genetically modified cotton in the Show-Me State, paving the way for a new branch of research that demonstrates the delightful intertwining of science and serendipity.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Eddy and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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]]
"Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the world turns and spins through the cotton fields of life, the blossoming world of agricultural research continues to yield new insights into the relationship between human quirks and farming practices. In this age of data analysis and discovery, the unexpected connections between seemingly unrelated variables often take researchers by surprise, much like a forgotten cotton ball left in a pocket before laundry day—turning up in the most unexpected places.
The realm of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has long been a hotbed of debate and speculation, but it seems that amid the rows of cotton in Missouri, a different kind of buzz has emerged. That's right, it's the "Eddy" effect—a phenomenon where individuals bearing the name "Eddy" may unknowingly be influencing the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. Who would have thought that this prolific first name could be entangled in the fabric of agricultural practices?
Now, before we get tangled in a web of puns and cotton-related wordplay, let's address the proverbial elephant in the room—why on earth would we even consider examining the link between a first name and GMO use in cotton? The answer, my dear readers, lies in the subtle art of statistical analysis and the curiosity that fuels scientific inquiry. As researchers, it's our duty to explore the hidden patterns that defy conventional wisdom, even if it means straying into the more offbeat corridors of research.
So, saddle up and prepare to delve into the world of "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" as we unravel the enigma of how an innocent name could potentially steer the course of agricultural innovation. As our findings reveal, there's more to this peculiar novelty than meets the eye, and perhaps a few giggles along the way.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri over the period from 2005 to 2022. This correlation suggests a strong positive relationship between the two variables, prompting further investigation into the unexpected and, dare I say, "Eddy-fying" influence on agricultural practices.
The coefficient of determination (r-squared) was found to be 0.6246044, indicating that approximately 62.46% of the variability in GMO cotton use can be explained by the variation in the popularity of the name "Eddy." In statistical terms, this is a substantial portion of variance accounted for, leaving only a modest amount of unexplained variability in the data, like that one cotton seed that always seems to escape into the washing machine lint trap.
Moreover, the p-value obtained from the analysis was less than 0.01, suggesting that the correlation observed is statistically significant. In other words, the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation by mere chance is as rare as stumbling upon a purple cotton plant in the heart of Missouri—a statistical oddity indeed!
As a visual representation of our findings, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) vividly illustrates the robust correlation between the prevalence of the name "Eddy" and the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming. It's almost as visually striking as a field of genetically modified cotton bolls, but don't worry, we won't be spinning any tall tales about GMO cotton unicorns - we'll leave that to the folklore researchers.
These results not only highlight the statistically significant relationship between the popularity of the first name "Eddy" and GMO use in cotton but also lend themselves to intriguing interpretations and pun-tential avenues for further investigation. The "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" phenomenon may seem like a quirky coincidence, but the data don't lie—there's a real thread of connection between the name "Eddy" and the cultivation of genetically modified cotton in the Show-Me State. And as researchers, we're always ready to unravel the unexpected mysteries that lend a touch of humor to our scientific pursuits.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" phenomenon presents a compelling yarn of correlation between the popularity of the name "Eddy" and the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming. Our research has unraveled an unexpected twist in the agricultural fabric, highlighting the potential influence of alphanumeric nomenclature on farming practices. However, while this study has spun an intriguing tale of statistical significance and pun-tential wordplay, it's time to crop the 'Eddy' fields of research. This investigation has gleaned insights as valuable as organic cotton and as amusing as a field of GMO cotton bolls, but further research in this area may risk spinning too many yarns or, heaven forbid, cottoning on to unsubstantiated claims. With statistical significance as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, we can confidently assert that the "Cotton-pickin' Eddys" phenomenon has been thoroughly examined and no further research is needed. We've sown the seeds of knowledge, reaped the statistical harvest, and now, it's time to let this quirky tale of "Eddy" and GMO cotton find its place in the annals of agricultural whimsy.


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 Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agro Eddy Dynamics


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 Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Agricultural Innovation and Research (CAIR)


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 Cotton-pickin' Eddys: Exploring the Correlation between Eddy Popularity and GMO Cotton in the Show-Me State with an abstract of This paper investigates the fascinating relationship between the prevalence of the first name "Eddy" and the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in the state of Missouri. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we conducted a thorough analysis covering the years 2005 to 2022. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.7903191 with a p-value less than 0.01, prompting further inquiry into the unsuspected influence of Eddys in the realm of GMO cotton production. While this study may seem to wade through the cotton fields of curiosities, the results provide both intricate observations and a touch of levity, shedding light on the unanticipated interplay between agricultural practices and alphanumeric nomenclature.

ChatGPT:

"Eddy name popularity, GMO cotton correlation," "US Social Security Administration data, USDA genetic modified cotton," "Missouri cotton farming Eddy correlation," "Eddy prevalence and cotton farming analysis," "Eddy name influence on GMO cotton production," "Alphanumeric nomenclature and agricultural practices correlation," "Missouri agricultural data analysis," "Eddy name correlation with cotton production," "Eddy influence on cotton farming in Missouri."

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

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

Correlation r = 0.7903191 (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 = 0.6246044 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 62.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Missouri) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Eddy) over the 18 years from 2005 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 9.5E-5. 0.0000949848572615520100000000
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 0.79 in 0.0095% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 10,528 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 17 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 17 because we have two variables measured over a period of 18 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.

[ 0.51, 0.92 ] 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.
200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Popularity of the first name Eddy (Babies born)164230166174200165178178155139124139120123111108118119
GMO use in cotton in Missouri (GMO cotton %)20321312182222336216125627124




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([164,230,166,174,200,165,178,178,155,139,124,139,120,123,111,108,118,119,])
array_2 = np.array([20,32,13,12,18,22,22,33,6,21,6,12,5,6,2,7,12,4,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Eddy"
array_2_name = "GMO use in cotton in Missouri"

# 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?

Your rating skills are legendary!


Correlation ID: 2602 · Black Variable ID: 4080 · Red Variable ID: 773
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0