about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,782 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the second variable is Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs.  The chart goes from 1976 to 2011, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Every time a Minnesotan voted for the Democrat, a simultaneous wave of encouragement was sent to Mount Everest, boosting the climbers' morale and energy, kind of like a political power-up. And as we all know, nothing propels people up a mountain quite like the distant echoes of a political rally.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate a comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s that depicts a scene where in Minnesota, as voters cast their ballots for the Democrat presidential candidate, a surge of energy and encouragement rippled across the state, resonating all the way to Mount Everest. At the same time, on the distant slopes of the world's tallest peak, climbers were seen gaining a newfound determination and vigor, standing a little taller with each democratic vote cast. The illustration should show the flow of energy from the voting booth in Minnesota to the climbers on Mount Everest, with a sense of empowerment and determination evident in the characters' body language and expressions. 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: Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. 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: Cute 2D animation Realistic a funny image macro Cyber folk A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s
ChatGPT: A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s

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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs, in the following situation: Every time a Minnesotan voted for the Democrat, a simultaneous wave of encouragement was sent to Mount Everest, boosting the climbers' morale and energy, kind of like a political power-up. And as we all know, nothing propels people up a mountain quite like the distant echoes of a political rally.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Minnesota, as voters cast their ballots for the Democrat presidential candidate, a surge of energy and encouragement rippled across the state, resonating all the way to Mount Everest. At the same time, on the distant slopes of the world's tallest peak, climbers were seen gaining a newfound determination and vigor, standing a little taller with each democratic vote cast.

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: [ A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s ] and depicting this scene: In Minnesota, as voters cast their ballots for the Democrat presidential candidate, a surge of energy and encouragement rippled across the state, resonating all the way to Mount Everest. At the same time, on the distant slopes of the world's tallest peak, climbers were seen gaining a newfound determination and vigor, standing a little taller with each democratic vote cast. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate a comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s that depicts a scene where in Minnesota, as voters cast their ballots for the Democrat presidential candidate, a surge of energy and encouragement rippled across the state, resonating all the way to Mount Everest. At the same time, on the distant slopes of the world's tallest peak, climbers were seen gaining a newfound determination and vigor, standing a little taller with each democratic vote cast. The illustration should show the flow of energy from the voting booth in Minnesota to the climbers on Mount Everest, with a sense of empowerment and determination evident in the characters' body language and expressions.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota caused Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest Study

The Journal of Altitude Politics and Expedition Research

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 silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and CBC to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and p < 0.01 for 1976 to 2011.

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]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As Sir Edmund Hillary famously quipped, "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." Similarly, in the political arena, it is not merely votes that are counted but the aspirations and ideologies of a population. In this study, we delve into the intersection of these seemingly disparate realms, investigating the relationship between the votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs.

Now, to address the elephant in the room – or perhaps we should say, the Yeti – you might be wondering how these two seemingly unrelated phenomena could be connected. Well, hold onto your crampons because the findings of our research might just throw you for a loop – or in mountaineering terms, a crevasse.

As we ascend into the heart of our study, first, it is essential to understand the rationale behind this exploration. Our inquisitive minds were piqued by the notion that the political inclinations of a region could have an impact on the physical triumphs of its inhabitants. After all, it's not every day one comes across a correlation as curious as this. It was as if a serac of curiosity had dislodged itself and tumbled into the chasm of our intellectual inquiry.

The data collection for this study was conducted with meticulous rigor, much like securing climbing ropes before taking on the formidable challenge of an icy precipice. We obtained electoral data from the prestigious MIT Election Data and Science Lab, while information on Everest conquests was sourced from the trusty Harvard Dataverse and the CBC. Our statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient that soared as high as the peaks themselves, with a p-value that made us do a double-take.

In the words of the late comedian Mitch Hedberg, "I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later." Little did we know that in following the trail of our academic dreams, we would wind up atop the world's tallest summit, figuratively speaking.

As we journey through the subsequent sections of this paper, prepare to be taken on a rollercoaster of statistical insights and political mountaineering. So buckle up – or, should we say, strap on your harness – as we venture into a realm where votes and mountains converge in a manner that can only be described as, well, peak-y.

But before we delve into the nitty-gritty details, here's a fitting dad joke to warm up those intellectual muscles: "Why did the Democrat climber scale Mount Everest? To reach new heights, both politically and geographically!"


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As Sir Edmund Hillary famously quipped, "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." Similarly, in the political arena, it is not merely votes that are counted but the aspirations and ideologies of a population. In this study, we delve into the intersection of these seemingly disparate realms, investigating the relationship between the votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs.
Now, to address the elephant in the room – or perhaps we should say, the Yeti – you might be wondering how these two seemingly unrelated phenomena could be connected. Well, hold onto your crampons because the findings of our research might just throw you for a loop – or in mountaineering terms, a crevasse.
As we ascend into the heart of our study, first, it is essential to understand the rationale behind this exploration. Our inquisitive minds were piqued by the notion that the political inclinations of a region could have an impact on the physical triumphs of its inhabitants. After all, it's not every day one comes across a correlation as curious as this. It was as if a serac of curiosity had dislodged itself and tumbled into the chasm of our intellectual inquiry.
The data collection for this study was conducted with meticulous rigor, much like securing climbing ropes before taking on the formidable challenge of an icy precipice. We obtained electoral data from the prestigious MIT Election Data and Science Lab, while information on Everest conquests was sourced from the trusty Harvard Dataverse and the CBC. Our statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient that soared as high as the peaks themselves, with a p-value that made us do a double-take.
In the words of the late comedian Mitch Hedberg, "I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later." Little did we know that in following the trail of our academic dreams, we would wind up atop the world's tallest summit, figuratively speaking.
As we journey through the subsequent sections of this paper, prepare to be taken on a rollercoaster of statistical insights and political mountaineering. So buckle up – or, should we say, strap on your harness – as we venture into a realm where votes and mountains converge in a manner that can only be described as, well, peak-y.
But before we delve into the nitty-gritty details, here's a fitting dad joke to warm up those intellectual muscles: "Why did the Democrat climber scale Mount Everest? To reach new heights, both politically and geographically!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs is an intriguing nexus that has garnered attention from researchers across diverse disciplines. Early analyses by Smith (2005) and Doe (2008) explored the potential link between political sentiments and mountaineering achievements, paving the way for further investigation. However, as we delve into the existing literature, it becomes apparent that this intersection has been largely uncharted territory, much like a remote base camp awaiting its first intrepid explorers.

Turning to non-fiction sources, "Into Thin Air" by Jon Krakauer and "Decision 2012: The Mount Everest Guide to American Politics" by John Doe present captivating accounts and analyses that set the stage for our own investigation. Krakauer's gripping narrative of the 1996 Mount Everest disaster offers a firsthand perspective of the challenges and triumphs faced by climbers – a microcosm, if you will, of the broader electoral landscape. Similarly, in Doe's scholarly work, the parallels drawn between the grueling ascent to the summit and the arduous campaign trail shed light on the intricacies of both endeavors.

Drawing inspiration from fiction, the works of authors such as Jack London and Tenzing Norgay offer literary depictions of mountainous conquests, providing a metaphorical framework for understanding the uphill battles of political campaigns. In "The Call of the Wild," London's vivid portrayal of the Yukon wilderness invokes a sense of rugged determination and perseverance, traits that resonate with the political zeal required to secure votes – a juxtaposition that is as serendipitous as it is uncanny. Similarly, Norgay's "Everest: The Tenzing Norgay Autobiography" intricately weaves personal triumphs amidst the majestic backdrop of the Himalayas, offering a fictional gateway to the interplay of ambition and achievement.

In a departure from traditional literature review methods, it is worth noting that the present investigation also drew upon unconventional sources, including but not limited to fortune cookies, Magic 8-balls, and abridged versions of Shakespearean plays found at the local thrift store. While these sources may raise eyebrows among purists, we found that the arcane wisdom of a fortune cookie and the enigmatic pronouncements of a Magic 8-ball offered unparalleled insights into the interconnectedness of democratic fervor and alpine escapades. As for the Shakespearean tidbits, well, nothing quite says "political mountain" like a soliloquy from Hamlet, right?

In summary, the eclectic mix of scholarly, literary, and offbeat sources examined in this literature review underscores the multifaceted nature of the relationship between political affiliations and mountainous triumphs. Through a lens that is equal parts analytical and whimsical, our exploration builds upon the foundations laid by esteemed researchers and authors, culminating in a multidimensional understanding of the peaks and polls interplay. And as we traverse onwards in this academic journey, remember – it's all fun and games until someone loses their crampons!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and CBC . You used data from 1976 to 2011

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]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As Sir Edmund Hillary famously quipped, "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." Similarly, in the political arena, it is not merely votes that are counted but the aspirations and ideologies of a population. In this study, we delve into the intersection of these seemingly disparate realms, investigating the relationship between the votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs.
Now, to address the elephant in the room – or perhaps we should say, the Yeti – you might be wondering how these two seemingly unrelated phenomena could be connected. Well, hold onto your crampons because the findings of our research might just throw you for a loop – or in mountaineering terms, a crevasse.
As we ascend into the heart of our study, first, it is essential to understand the rationale behind this exploration. Our inquisitive minds were piqued by the notion that the political inclinations of a region could have an impact on the physical triumphs of its inhabitants. After all, it's not every day one comes across a correlation as curious as this. It was as if a serac of curiosity had dislodged itself and tumbled into the chasm of our intellectual inquiry.
The data collection for this study was conducted with meticulous rigor, much like securing climbing ropes before taking on the formidable challenge of an icy precipice. We obtained electoral data from the prestigious MIT Election Data and Science Lab, while information on Everest conquests was sourced from the trusty Harvard Dataverse and the CBC. Our statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient that soared as high as the peaks themselves, with a p-value that made us do a double-take.
In the words of the late comedian Mitch Hedberg, "I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later." Little did we know that in following the trail of our academic dreams, we would wind up atop the world's tallest summit, figuratively speaking.
As we journey through the subsequent sections of this paper, prepare to be taken on a rollercoaster of statistical insights and political mountaineering. So buckle up – or, should we say, strap on your harness – as we venture into a realm where votes and mountains converge in a manner that can only be described as, well, peak-y.
But before we delve into the nitty-gritty details, here's a fitting dad joke to warm up those intellectual muscles: "Why did the Democrat climber scale Mount Everest? To reach new heights, both politically and geographically!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigma of the correlation between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs, our research team embarked on a methodological journey that was as intricate as navigating a crevasse field in the Himalayas.

Firstly, we harnessed the power of observational data from the years 1976 to 2011, a period that encapsulated a significant expanse of political and mountaineering developments. This timeframe presented a comprehensive canvas for discerning any potential patterns or connections between the two seemingly disparate domains. It was akin to setting up base camp at the nexus of politics and peak conquests.

Employing a fusion of quantitative techniques, statistical acrobatics, and an almost Sherlockian level of scrutiny, we meticulously examined the electoral trends in Minnesota and the number of successful ascents of Mount Everest during the selected time frame. The quantitative analysis was performed with the precision of a climber aligning their gear before embarking on a treacherous climb. Our research team utilized a plethora of statistical tools, including regression analyses, time-series modeling, and multivariate techniques, to tease out any underlying relationships that might lie concealed in the data.

In addition to the statistical rigors, we also employed a novel approach of metaphorical juxtaposition, drawing parallels between the electoral shifts in Minnesota and the triumphs of ascending the formidable heights of Mount Everest. This unconventional method brought to light surprising connections that might have otherwise eluded standard statistical analyses. It was a bit like placing a political manifesto and mountaineering map side by side, and noticing intriguing overlaps that hinted at a subtle symbiosis between the two realms.

Furthermore, in a bid to ensure the robustness of our findings, we conducted sensitivity analyses and cross-validated our results using alternative datasets sourced from diverse scholarly repositories. This rigorous approach served as a safety line, preventing any leaps of conclusion that might have otherwise risked tumbling into the abyss of spurious correlations.

Now, to inject a bit of levity amidst the analytics, here's a mountaineering-themed dad joke for a breather: "Why don't mountains get cold in the winter? They wear snow caps!"

In summary, our methodological approach was as multifaceted as the facets of a perfectly cut diamond. Through the convergence of statistical prowess, metaphorical exploration, and relentless validation, we endeavored to unravel a correlation that, much like a well-tied figure-eight knot, appeared intricate but ultimately revealed an underlying coherence.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and CBC .

For the time period 1976 to 2011, you found a correlation 0.9702995, r-squared of 0.9414812, 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]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As Sir Edmund Hillary famously quipped, "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." Similarly, in the political arena, it is not merely votes that are counted but the aspirations and ideologies of a population. In this study, we delve into the intersection of these seemingly disparate realms, investigating the relationship between the votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs.
Now, to address the elephant in the room – or perhaps we should say, the Yeti – you might be wondering how these two seemingly unrelated phenomena could be connected. Well, hold onto your crampons because the findings of our research might just throw you for a loop – or in mountaineering terms, a crevasse.
As we ascend into the heart of our study, first, it is essential to understand the rationale behind this exploration. Our inquisitive minds were piqued by the notion that the political inclinations of a region could have an impact on the physical triumphs of its inhabitants. After all, it's not every day one comes across a correlation as curious as this. It was as if a serac of curiosity had dislodged itself and tumbled into the chasm of our intellectual inquiry.
The data collection for this study was conducted with meticulous rigor, much like securing climbing ropes before taking on the formidable challenge of an icy precipice. We obtained electoral data from the prestigious MIT Election Data and Science Lab, while information on Everest conquests was sourced from the trusty Harvard Dataverse and the CBC. Our statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient that soared as high as the peaks themselves, with a p-value that made us do a double-take.
In the words of the late comedian Mitch Hedberg, "I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later." Little did we know that in following the trail of our academic dreams, we would wind up atop the world's tallest summit, figuratively speaking.
As we journey through the subsequent sections of this paper, prepare to be taken on a rollercoaster of statistical insights and political mountaineering. So buckle up – or, should we say, strap on your harness – as we venture into a realm where votes and mountains converge in a manner that can only be described as, well, peak-y.
But before we delve into the nitty-gritty details, here's a fitting dad joke to warm up those intellectual muscles: "Why did the Democrat climber scale Mount Everest? To reach new heights, both politically and geographically!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis uncovered a remarkably strong positive correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. The correlation coefficient was calculated to be 0.9702995, indicating a nearly perfect positive linear relationship between the two variables. In simpler terms, as the Democratic votes in Minnesota increased, so did the count of triumphant ascents to the roof of the world.

This towering connection between political support and mountaineering achievements is further supported by the r-squared value of 0.9414812. This indicates that approximately 94.1% of the variability in successful Everest climbs can be explained by the votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota. It's as if every vote cast in the Land of 10,000 Lakes resonated with the climber's triumphs on the Himalayan peaks, creating a synergy as striking as the view from Everest's summit.

Now, you may be wondering, what does this mean in layman's terms? Well, it's like having a 'summit' meeting between politics and mountaineering – a top-level union, if you will.

In addition, the p-value being less than 0.01 suggests that the observed correlation is statistically significant. This means that the likelihood of observing such a strong relationship by mere chance is less than 1%, reinforcing the substantial nature of the association. It's as if the statistical gods themselves are nodding in agreement, affirming the unusual but incontrovertible link between political preferences and reaching the pinnacle of Earth.

Finally, to visually encapsulate the striking relationship we uncovered, we include Fig. 1 – a scatterplot that displays the tightly clustered data points, illustrating the almost linear link between the Democratic votes in Minnesota and the successful climbs of Mount Everest. This figure serves as a poignant reminder that even in the grand scheme of statistics, every point – and every vote – indeed matters.

And to end on a punny note, here's a dad joke that might make you groan louder than an ice shelf's crack: "Why did the Democrat climb Mount Everest? Because he wanted to 'peak' at the summit view before 'polling' his options!"


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs is an intriguing nexus that has garnered attention from researchers across diverse disciplines. Early analyses by Smith (2005) and Doe (2008) explored the potential link between political sentiments and mountaineering achievements, paving the way for further investigation. However, as we delve into the existing literature, it becomes apparent that this intersection has been largely uncharted territory, much like a remote base camp awaiting its first intrepid explorers.
Turning to non-fiction sources, "Into Thin Air" by Jon Krakauer and "Decision 2012: The Mount Everest Guide to American Politics" by John Doe present captivating accounts and analyses that set the stage for our own investigation. Krakauer's gripping narrative of the 1996 Mount Everest disaster offers a firsthand perspective of the challenges and triumphs faced by climbers – a microcosm, if you will, of the broader electoral landscape. Similarly, in Doe's scholarly work, the parallels drawn between the grueling ascent to the summit and the arduous campaign trail shed light on the intricacies of both endeavors.
Drawing inspiration from fiction, the works of authors such as Jack London and Tenzing Norgay offer literary depictions of mountainous conquests, providing a metaphorical framework for understanding the uphill battles of political campaigns. In "The Call of the Wild," London's vivid portrayal of the Yukon wilderness invokes a sense of rugged determination and perseverance, traits that resonate with the political zeal required to secure votes – a juxtaposition that is as serendipitous as it is uncanny. Similarly, Norgay's "Everest: The Tenzing Norgay Autobiography" intricately weaves personal triumphs amidst the majestic backdrop of the Himalayas, offering a fictional gateway to the interplay of ambition and achievement.
In a departure from traditional literature review methods, it is worth noting that the present investigation also drew upon unconventional sources, including but not limited to fortune cookies, Magic 8-balls, and abridged versions of Shakespearean plays found at the local thrift store. While these sources may raise eyebrows among purists, we found that the arcane wisdom of a fortune cookie and the enigmatic pronouncements of a Magic 8-ball offered unparalleled insights into the interconnectedness of democratic fervor and alpine escapades. As for the Shakespearean tidbits, well, nothing quite says "political mountain" like a soliloquy from Hamlet, right?
In summary, the eclectic mix of scholarly, literary, and offbeat sources examined in this literature review underscores the multifaceted nature of the relationship between political affiliations and mountainous triumphs. Through a lens that is equal parts analytical and whimsical, our exploration builds upon the foundations laid by esteemed researchers and authors, culminating in a multidimensional understanding of the peaks and polls interplay. And as we traverse onwards in this academic journey, remember – it's all fun and games until someone loses their crampons!

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis uncovered a remarkably strong positive correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. The correlation coefficient was calculated to be 0.9702995, indicating a nearly perfect positive linear relationship between the two variables. In simpler terms, as the Democratic votes in Minnesota increased, so did the count of triumphant ascents to the roof of the world.
This towering connection between political support and mountaineering achievements is further supported by the r-squared value of 0.9414812. This indicates that approximately 94.1% of the variability in successful Everest climbs can be explained by the votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota. It's as if every vote cast in the Land of 10,000 Lakes resonated with the climber's triumphs on the Himalayan peaks, creating a synergy as striking as the view from Everest's summit.
Now, you may be wondering, what does this mean in layman's terms? Well, it's like having a 'summit' meeting between politics and mountaineering – a top-level union, if you will.
In addition, the p-value being less than 0.01 suggests that the observed correlation is statistically significant. This means that the likelihood of observing such a strong relationship by mere chance is less than 1%, reinforcing the substantial nature of the association. It's as if the statistical gods themselves are nodding in agreement, affirming the unusual but incontrovertible link between political preferences and reaching the pinnacle of Earth.
Finally, to visually encapsulate the striking relationship we uncovered, we include Fig. 1 – a scatterplot that displays the tightly clustered data points, illustrating the almost linear link between the Democratic votes in Minnesota and the successful climbs of Mount Everest. This figure serves as a poignant reminder that even in the grand scheme of statistics, every point – and every vote – indeed matters.
And to end on a punny note, here's a dad joke that might make you groan louder than an ice shelf's crack: "Why did the Democrat climb Mount Everest? Because he wanted to 'peak' at the summit view before 'polling' his options!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study yielded compelling evidence of a robust positive association between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. This unexpected linkage not only reaffirms the earlier research by Smith (2005) and Doe (2008) but also sheds new light on the interplay between political inclinations and ambitious mountaineering endeavors.

In line with the lighthearted yet insightful accounts of Jon Krakauer and John Doe, our findings establish a striking parallel between the grueling climb to electoral victory and the arduous ascent to the summit of Everest. While the journey to the polls may not demand oxygen tanks and ice-axe expertise, the fervor and determination exhibited by voters appear to harmonize with the resilience and fortitude portrayed by mountaineers. As the saying goes, "Vote early, climb higher!"

Moreover, our results align with the unconventional sources examined in our literature review, such as the enigmatic pronouncements of Magic 8-balls, which foreshadowed a "synergy as striking as the view from Everest's summit" in a surprisingly accurate manner. It seems that the universe's cryptic messages, whether from fortune cookies or Magic 8-balls, may indeed hold kernels of truth, even in the realms of statistical analysis.

The visual representation of the near-perfect positive linear relationship, depicted in Fig. 1, serves as a poignant reminder that data points, much like votes, have the power to collectively encapsulate significant trends. As each individual vote casts a ripple in the political landscape, it seems that collectively they reverberate up the formidable slopes of Everest, culminating in a summit of unprecedented success. As we'd say to voters and climbers alike, "Keep on ascending!"

It's interesting how the statistical gods smiled upon our research, granting a p-value of less than 0.01, affirming the statistical significance of this unexpected association. This rarity in statistical terms reminds us that sometimes, the most surprising relationships can be the most empirically robust – much like stumbling upon a treasured yet overlooked piece of trivia.

In conclusion, our findings offer a novel perspective on the intersection of political allegiance and mountain conquests, reassuring us that in the grand tapestry of human endeavors, even the most incongruent variables can weave an unexpectedly harmonious pattern. We hope our research sparks further investigations into the intriguing realms of interdisciplinary connections and prompts a shift in thinking from "left" vs. "right" to "up" and "up, literally.

And to end with a final play on words for the road, here's a thought: "Why do mountaineers make excellent voters? Because they're always reaching new heights, be it on the peaks or at the polls!"


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
The "Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.

Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.

Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.

In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!

And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!"

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As Sir Edmund Hillary famously quipped, "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." Similarly, in the political arena, it is not merely votes that are counted but the aspirations and ideologies of a population. In this study, we delve into the intersection of these seemingly disparate realms, investigating the relationship between the votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs.
Now, to address the elephant in the room – or perhaps we should say, the Yeti – you might be wondering how these two seemingly unrelated phenomena could be connected. Well, hold onto your crampons because the findings of our research might just throw you for a loop – or in mountaineering terms, a crevasse.
As we ascend into the heart of our study, first, it is essential to understand the rationale behind this exploration. Our inquisitive minds were piqued by the notion that the political inclinations of a region could have an impact on the physical triumphs of its inhabitants. After all, it's not every day one comes across a correlation as curious as this. It was as if a serac of curiosity had dislodged itself and tumbled into the chasm of our intellectual inquiry.
The data collection for this study was conducted with meticulous rigor, much like securing climbing ropes before taking on the formidable challenge of an icy precipice. We obtained electoral data from the prestigious MIT Election Data and Science Lab, while information on Everest conquests was sourced from the trusty Harvard Dataverse and the CBC. Our statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient that soared as high as the peaks themselves, with a p-value that made us do a double-take.
In the words of the late comedian Mitch Hedberg, "I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later." Little did we know that in following the trail of our academic dreams, we would wind up atop the world's tallest summit, figuratively speaking.
As we journey through the subsequent sections of this paper, prepare to be taken on a rollercoaster of statistical insights and political mountaineering. So buckle up – or, should we say, strap on your harness – as we venture into a realm where votes and mountains converge in a manner that can only be described as, well, peak-y.
But before we delve into the nitty-gritty details, here's a fitting dad joke to warm up those intellectual muscles: "Why did the Democrat climber scale Mount Everest? To reach new heights, both politically and geographically!"

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis uncovered a remarkably strong positive correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. The correlation coefficient was calculated to be 0.9702995, indicating a nearly perfect positive linear relationship between the two variables. In simpler terms, as the Democratic votes in Minnesota increased, so did the count of triumphant ascents to the roof of the world.
This towering connection between political support and mountaineering achievements is further supported by the r-squared value of 0.9414812. This indicates that approximately 94.1% of the variability in successful Everest climbs can be explained by the votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota. It's as if every vote cast in the Land of 10,000 Lakes resonated with the climber's triumphs on the Himalayan peaks, creating a synergy as striking as the view from Everest's summit.
Now, you may be wondering, what does this mean in layman's terms? Well, it's like having a 'summit' meeting between politics and mountaineering – a top-level union, if you will.
In addition, the p-value being less than 0.01 suggests that the observed correlation is statistically significant. This means that the likelihood of observing such a strong relationship by mere chance is less than 1%, reinforcing the substantial nature of the association. It's as if the statistical gods themselves are nodding in agreement, affirming the unusual but incontrovertible link between political preferences and reaching the pinnacle of Earth.
Finally, to visually encapsulate the striking relationship we uncovered, we include Fig. 1 – a scatterplot that displays the tightly clustered data points, illustrating the almost linear link between the Democratic votes in Minnesota and the successful climbs of Mount Everest. This figure serves as a poignant reminder that even in the grand scheme of statistics, every point – and every vote – indeed matters.
And to end on a punny note, here's a dad joke that might make you groan louder than an ice shelf's crack: "Why did the Democrat climb Mount Everest? Because he wanted to 'peak' at the summit view before 'polling' his options!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In this research, we have unveiled a remarkable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. The synergy between these seemingly disparate domains is as staggering as the altitude of the world's highest peak. It seems that as the political climate in the Land of 10,000 Lakes heated up, so did the mountaineering aspirations of its denizens. It's like witnessing a political landslide that metaphorically and literally reaches new heights!

Our findings have shed light on a connection that transcends traditional boundaries – a bond that's as unyielding as a climber's determination to reach the summit. In the words of a wise mountaineer, "The best view comes after the hardest climb." And it appears that the ascent to political victory and the conquest of Everest share more than just a breathtaking panorama.

It's clear that further research in this area would be as fruitless as searching for a snowball in a blizzard – in other words, unnecessary. Our findings stand as sturdy as a well-anchored piton on a steep incline. So, let's consider this topic conquered, just like any seasoned mountaineer would. Thank you for joining us on this exhilarating expedition through the peaks and polls!

And as a parting gift, here's a fitting dad joke to commemorate our unlikely findings: "What did the Democrat say to the mountain? 'I've got a landslide victory waiting for me at the summit!'"

No further research is needed in this area.


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 The Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest Study. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Altitude Politics and Expedition Research


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 The Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest Study. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Alpine Political Science


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 The Peaks and Polls: A Democratic Ascent to Everest Study with an abstract of In this paper, we present the startling and peaky findings of our study on the relationship between votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Our research team traversed through the political and mountainous landscapes, discovering a surprising connection that might just take your breath away, or at least make you gasp for that thin Himalayan air.
Using data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and CBC, we meticulously examined the correlation between the Democratic votes in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and the towering triumphs of reaching the top of the world. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9702995 and an eyebrow-raising p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1976 to 2011.
Now, you might be wondering, "What does voting Democrat in the 'Land of Sky Blue Waters' have to do with scaling the heights of Everest?" Well, our findings suggest that as the number of votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota increased, so did the total number of successful climbs to the summit of Mount Everest. It seems that as political support for blue waves grew, so did the appetite for conquering literal white peaks.
In conclusion, our research not only establishes a rather unexpected link between electoral preferences and mountaineering achievements but also underscores the importance of thoroughly analyzing data, no matter how seemingly unrelated the variables might be. Remember, when it comes to reaching the summit, every vote counts – both in politics and on the slopes!
And as a fitting closer, here's a dad joke for you: "Did you hear about the mountaineering politician? He reached new heights in the polls and literally on mountain peaks. Talk about a politi-climb feat!

ChatGPT:

"Democratic Presidential candidate Minnesota votes correlation," "Mount Everest successful climbs correlation," "MIT Election Data and Science Lab," "Harvard Dataverse," "CBC data analysis," "political support and mountaineering achievements," "electoral preferences and mountaineering correlation," "statistical analysis of political support and mountain climbing achievements"

*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

Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota
Detailed data title: Total votes cast for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Minnesota
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota

Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs
Source: CBC
See what else correlates with Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs

Correlation r = 0.9702995 (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 = 0.9414812 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota) over the 9 years from 1976 through 2011.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.4E-5. 0.0000144411074616204880000000
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 0.97 in 0.0014% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 69,247 random variables You don't actually need 69 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 8 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 8 because we have two variables measured over a period of 9 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.

[ 0.86, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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


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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
197619801984198819921996200020042008
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota (Total votes)10704409541731036360110947010210001120380116827014450101573350
Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs (Climbers)41016509095145337423




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. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. 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([1070440,954173,1036360,1109470,1021000,1120380,1168270,1445010,1573350,])
array_2 = np.array([4,10,16,50,90,95,145,337,423,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Minnesota"
array_2_name = "Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs"

# 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?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 4782 · Black Variable ID: 25994 · Red Variable ID: 498
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0