about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,371 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton and the second variable is Google searches for 'desktop background'.  The chart goes from 2007 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The decrease in GMO cotton may have led to a shortage in fabric, prompting people to use their cotton for clothing instead of quirky desktop background photo shoots. As a result, the demand for desktop backgrounds may have decreased. Remember, a pixel saved is a pixel earned!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that captures the essence of a TIME magazine cover image showcasing a serene scene in a sunlit cotton field. In the foreground, tall, lush green cotton stalks gently sway in the breeze, each adorned with plump, white cotton bolls signifying genetic modifications. In the background, a person sits at a computer, surrounded by the technological fruits of Google's search engine capabilities, browsing through vibrant landscapes and serene seascapes to find the perfect desktop background. The scene should have a harmonious blend of nature and technology, with a focus on the person's search for tranquility amidst the advancing digital landscape. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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: Macabre Minimalism Sci-fi fantacy A TIME magazine cover image Woodblock painting
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover image

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background' together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a sunlit cotton field, tall green stalks sway gently in the breeze. Each plant bears plump, white cotton bolls, hinting at the genetic modifications that have made them resistant to pests and disease. Meanwhile, nearby, a person sits at a computer, their screen filled with images of vibrant landscapes and serene seascapes. They are busy searching for the perfect desktop background, surrounded by the technological fruits of Google's search engine capabilities.

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 TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a sunlit cotton field, tall green stalks sway gently in the breeze. Each plant bears plump, white cotton bolls, hinting at the genetic modifications that have made them resistant to pests and disease. Meanwhile, nearby, a person sits at a computer, their screen filled with images of vibrant landscapes and serene seascapes. They are busy searching for the perfect desktop background, surrounded by the technological fruits of Google's search engine capabilities. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that captures the essence of a TIME magazine cover image showcasing a serene scene in a sunlit cotton field. In the foreground, tall, lush green cotton stalks gently sway in the breeze, each adorned with plump, white cotton bolls signifying genetic modifications. In the background, a person sits at a computer, surrounded by the technological fruits of Google's search engine capabilities, browsing through vibrant landscapes and serene seascapes to find the perfect desktop background. The scene should have a harmonious blend of nature and technology, with a focus on the person's search for tranquility amidst the advancing digital landscape.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in GMO use in cotton caused desktop background (Google searches for 'desktop background') to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches

The Journal of Genetic Quirkology

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from USDA and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 for 2007 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]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of 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]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION

The fascinating and often bizarre world of scientific research sometimes leads us down unexpected paths. In this study, we aim to explore the quirky and unexpected connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." While one might initially assume these two realms to be entirely unrelated, our investigation reveals a surprisingly strong correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and the digital quest for aesthetically pleasing desktop adornments.

Our choice of analogy for the research title - "Genetically Modified Oddities" - reflects the offbeat and enigmatic nature of the relationship we seek to illuminate. Much like the whimsical realm of desktop background designs and the quirky world of GMOs, this research will take readers on an engaging journey through unexpected correlations, statistical mysteries, and perhaps a few delightfully odd puns along the way.

The utilization of genetically modified cotton has been a subject of fervent debate and scrutiny in agricultural and environmental circles. Simultaneously, the intrigues of internet search behavior and the quirks of popular digital adornments have captivated the fascination of technologists and social observers. By forging a bridge between these seemingly disparate domains, we hope to add a touch of whimsy to the staid world of agricultural research and statistical analysis.

This study, which mineralizes Google Trends search data from 2007 to 2022 and employs USDA data on GMO cotton adoption, aims to unmask the peculiar relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. As we embark on this research odyssey, one can expect statistical nitty-gritty, agricultural insights, and, quite possibly, a touch of good-natured scientific whimsy. So fasten your seatbelts, dear readers, as we embark on this peculiar yet promising quest to shed light on the cotton connection between GMOs and goofy Google searches!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The fascinating and often bizarre world of scientific research sometimes leads us down unexpected paths. In this study, we aim to explore the quirky and unexpected connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." While one might initially assume these two realms to be entirely unrelated, our investigation reveals a surprisingly strong correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and the digital quest for aesthetically pleasing desktop adornments.
Our choice of analogy for the research title - "Genetically Modified Oddities" - reflects the offbeat and enigmatic nature of the relationship we seek to illuminate. Much like the whimsical realm of desktop background designs and the quirky world of GMOs, this research will take readers on an engaging journey through unexpected correlations, statistical mysteries, and perhaps a few delightfully odd puns along the way.
The utilization of genetically modified cotton has been a subject of fervent debate and scrutiny in agricultural and environmental circles. Simultaneously, the intrigues of internet search behavior and the quirks of popular digital adornments have captivated the fascination of technologists and social observers. By forging a bridge between these seemingly disparate domains, we hope to add a touch of whimsy to the staid world of agricultural research and statistical analysis.
This study, which mineralizes Google Trends search data from 2007 to 2022 and employs USDA data on GMO cotton adoption, aims to unmask the peculiar relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. As we embark on this research odyssey, one can expect statistical nitty-gritty, agricultural insights, and, quite possibly, a touch of good-natured scientific whimsy. So fasten your seatbelts, dear readers, as we embark on this peculiar yet promising quest to shed light on the cotton connection between GMOs and goofy Google searches!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Research into the interplay between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and unconventional Google searches has been a largely uncharted territory, until the recent influx of studies. Smith et al. (2018) have provided substantial evidence linking GMO use in cotton cultivation to shifts in online search behavior, with particular emphasis on the emergence of peculiar search queries related to digital desktop backgrounds. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2020) delve into the enigmatic realm of GMOs and cyberspace curiosities, uncovering a surprising correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the proclivity for extravagant desktop adornments.

In "The Omniscient Seed," the authors expound upon the intricate dynamics of GMO cotton cultivation and its potential influence on internet search patterns, including the often-overlooked pursuit of aesthetic digital embellishments. Furthermore, "Cotton Chronicles: From Field to Screen" presents a comprehensive exploration of the intertwined tapestry of GMO cotton and digital quirkiness, shedding light on the unexpected correlations that have captivated the scientific community.

Turning to fictional works with seemingly relevant titles, "The Cultivation Conundrum: A Tale of Genetically Modified Mysteries" and "The Enigmatic Quest for the Perfect Desktop Display" pique the reader's curiosity with their allusions to the whimsical world of GMOs and desktop adornments. The imaginative allure of these titles adds a touch of levity to an otherwise serious topic, offering a glimpse into the potential for scientific exploration to transcend the boundaries of the conventional.

As we venture further into the literature, it becomes apparent that the quest for insights on the cotton-Google search connection has taken us into unexpected realms. A brief diversion to explore the popular works "The Secret Life of Plants" and "The Art of Search Engine Optimization" unexpectedly led to the curious revelation that statistical mysteries and agricultural oddities are not entirely incompatible with the eclecticism of digital aesthetics. Finally, a mild dalliance with unconventional literature sources, including the backs of shampoo bottles, yielded surprising methodological inspiration and a quirky sense of humor that proves to be unexpectedly relevant to our research pursuits.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Google Trends . You used data from 2007 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]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The fascinating and often bizarre world of scientific research sometimes leads us down unexpected paths. In this study, we aim to explore the quirky and unexpected connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." While one might initially assume these two realms to be entirely unrelated, our investigation reveals a surprisingly strong correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and the digital quest for aesthetically pleasing desktop adornments.
Our choice of analogy for the research title - "Genetically Modified Oddities" - reflects the offbeat and enigmatic nature of the relationship we seek to illuminate. Much like the whimsical realm of desktop background designs and the quirky world of GMOs, this research will take readers on an engaging journey through unexpected correlations, statistical mysteries, and perhaps a few delightfully odd puns along the way.
The utilization of genetically modified cotton has been a subject of fervent debate and scrutiny in agricultural and environmental circles. Simultaneously, the intrigues of internet search behavior and the quirks of popular digital adornments have captivated the fascination of technologists and social observers. By forging a bridge between these seemingly disparate domains, we hope to add a touch of whimsy to the staid world of agricultural research and statistical analysis.
This study, which mineralizes Google Trends search data from 2007 to 2022 and employs USDA data on GMO cotton adoption, aims to unmask the peculiar relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. As we embark on this research odyssey, one can expect statistical nitty-gritty, agricultural insights, and, quite possibly, a touch of good-natured scientific whimsy. So fasten your seatbelts, dear readers, as we embark on this peculiar yet promising quest to shed light on the cotton connection between GMOs and goofy Google searches!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
This study harnessed a mix of scientific rigor and internet browsing finesse to collect and triangulate data from disparate sources. The primary source of GMO cotton adoption rates came from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This data spanned from 2007 to 2022, encompassing a rich harvest of statistical oddities and agricultural quirks. Google Trends emerged as the ripest vine for harvesting search trends on "desktop background," ensuring that no digital stone was left unturned in this quest for correlation.

Quantitative Quirks:
To measure the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and "desktop background" searches, this study employed the trusty Pearson correlation coefficient. This statistical wizardry was complemented by a p-value analysis, allowing us to gauge the statistical significance with a wink and a nod. Regression analysis also made a cameo, adding a touch of predictive pizzazz to our quantitative quirkiness. Through this amalgamation of statistical sleight of hand, we aimed to uncover the mysterious synchronicity between agricultural oddities and digital decorum.

Quixotic Assumptions:
In crafting our research design, we made a few unorthodox assumptions. Firstly, we assumed that the quirkiness of our dataset would be representative of the broader cotton and internet ecosystem. Additionally, we assumed that the Google search behavior for "desktop background" served as a whimsical proxy for broader digital aesthetic inquiries. While these assumptions may raise an eyebrow or two, they allowed us to peer into the convoluted yet captivating world of correlation and causation, where scientific mystery meets statistical mirth.

Cross-Pollination of Data:
To ensure the robustness of our findings, we cross-pollinated the USDA data with Google Trends search metrics, creating a veritable bouquet of agricultural and digital oddities. This approach allowed us to capture the zeitgeist of genetic shenanigans in cotton fields and, to borrow a digital vernacular, the bonanza of desktop background diversity. By marrying these disparate data streams, we sowed the seeds of correlation, cultivating a statistical crop that bore fruit with unexpected humor and quirkiness.

Analytical Acrobatics:
The analytical journey encompassed in this study involved a merry dance between R, Python, and a tinge of whimsical wit. Through exploratory data analysis, we untangled the genetic threads of GMO cotton adoption and juxtaposed them against the kaleidoscopic canvas of "desktop background" searches. This synaptic symphony of statistical acrobatics allowed us to envision the whimsical harmony between the agricultural oddities and digital diversions, showcasing the interpretative finesse required for this eccentric research endeavor.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 2007 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9168633, r-squared of 0.8406383, 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]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The fascinating and often bizarre world of scientific research sometimes leads us down unexpected paths. In this study, we aim to explore the quirky and unexpected connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." While one might initially assume these two realms to be entirely unrelated, our investigation reveals a surprisingly strong correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and the digital quest for aesthetically pleasing desktop adornments.
Our choice of analogy for the research title - "Genetically Modified Oddities" - reflects the offbeat and enigmatic nature of the relationship we seek to illuminate. Much like the whimsical realm of desktop background designs and the quirky world of GMOs, this research will take readers on an engaging journey through unexpected correlations, statistical mysteries, and perhaps a few delightfully odd puns along the way.
The utilization of genetically modified cotton has been a subject of fervent debate and scrutiny in agricultural and environmental circles. Simultaneously, the intrigues of internet search behavior and the quirks of popular digital adornments have captivated the fascination of technologists and social observers. By forging a bridge between these seemingly disparate domains, we hope to add a touch of whimsy to the staid world of agricultural research and statistical analysis.
This study, which mineralizes Google Trends search data from 2007 to 2022 and employs USDA data on GMO cotton adoption, aims to unmask the peculiar relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. As we embark on this research odyssey, one can expect statistical nitty-gritty, agricultural insights, and, quite possibly, a touch of good-natured scientific whimsy. So fasten your seatbelts, dear readers, as we embark on this peculiar yet promising quest to shed light on the cotton connection between GMOs and goofy Google searches!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis conducted on the data gathered from USDA and Google Trends yielded some rather intriguing results. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background."

The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 indicated a robust positive relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the level of public interest in jazzing up digital desktops. This correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8406383, suggesting that a substantial proportion (approximately 84%) of the variation in Google searches for "desktop background" could be explained by the adoption of GMO cotton. Moreover, the p-value of < 0.01 indicated that this relationship was highly statistically significant, leaving little room for skepticism about the strength of the observed association.

While such a strong correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a cow in a cotton field, our results unmistakably illustrate the surprising interconnectedness between these seemingly disparate realms. Fig. 1 depicts the scatterplot, providing a visual representation of the striking correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the popularity of desktop background searches.

This substantial correlation suggests that perhaps there is a collective yearning for a bit of color and novelty in our lives, whether it be in the agricultural landscape or on our computer screens. It appears that both GMO cotton and digital desktop décor share a common thread of captivating the curious minds of the masses.

This unexpected connection between GMOs and Google searches for desktop backgrounds highlights the whimsical nuances of statistical analysis, reminding us that even the most unrelated variables can share an uncanny bond when scrutinized under the lens of rigorous research.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of 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]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Research into the interplay between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and unconventional Google searches has been a largely uncharted territory, until the recent influx of studies. Smith et al. (2018) have provided substantial evidence linking GMO use in cotton cultivation to shifts in online search behavior, with particular emphasis on the emergence of peculiar search queries related to digital desktop backgrounds. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2020) delve into the enigmatic realm of GMOs and cyberspace curiosities, uncovering a surprising correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the proclivity for extravagant desktop adornments.
In "The Omniscient Seed," the authors expound upon the intricate dynamics of GMO cotton cultivation and its potential influence on internet search patterns, including the often-overlooked pursuit of aesthetic digital embellishments. Furthermore, "Cotton Chronicles: From Field to Screen" presents a comprehensive exploration of the intertwined tapestry of GMO cotton and digital quirkiness, shedding light on the unexpected correlations that have captivated the scientific community.
Turning to fictional works with seemingly relevant titles, "The Cultivation Conundrum: A Tale of Genetically Modified Mysteries" and "The Enigmatic Quest for the Perfect Desktop Display" pique the reader's curiosity with their allusions to the whimsical world of GMOs and desktop adornments. The imaginative allure of these titles adds a touch of levity to an otherwise serious topic, offering a glimpse into the potential for scientific exploration to transcend the boundaries of the conventional.
As we venture further into the literature, it becomes apparent that the quest for insights on the cotton-Google search connection has taken us into unexpected realms. A brief diversion to explore the popular works "The Secret Life of Plants" and "The Art of Search Engine Optimization" unexpectedly led to the curious revelation that statistical mysteries and agricultural oddities are not entirely incompatible with the eclecticism of digital aesthetics. Finally, a mild dalliance with unconventional literature sources, including the backs of shampoo bottles, yielded surprising methodological inspiration and a quirky sense of humor that proves to be unexpectedly relevant to our research pursuits.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data gathered from USDA and Google Trends yielded some rather intriguing results. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background."
The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 indicated a robust positive relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the level of public interest in jazzing up digital desktops. This correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8406383, suggesting that a substantial proportion (approximately 84%) of the variation in Google searches for "desktop background" could be explained by the adoption of GMO cotton. Moreover, the p-value of < 0.01 indicated that this relationship was highly statistically significant, leaving little room for skepticism about the strength of the observed association.
While such a strong correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a cow in a cotton field, our results unmistakably illustrate the surprising interconnectedness between these seemingly disparate realms. Fig. 1 depicts the scatterplot, providing a visual representation of the striking correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the popularity of desktop background searches.
This substantial correlation suggests that perhaps there is a collective yearning for a bit of color and novelty in our lives, whether it be in the agricultural landscape or on our computer screens. It appears that both GMO cotton and digital desktop décor share a common thread of captivating the curious minds of the masses.
This unexpected connection between GMOs and Google searches for desktop backgrounds highlights the whimsical nuances of statistical analysis, reminding us that even the most unrelated variables can share an uncanny bond when scrutinized under the lens of rigorous research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The robust correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background" is a whimsical twist in the intricate tapestry of agricultural and digital peculiarities. Our findings echoed the prior research of Smith et al. (2018) and Doe and Jones (2020), validating the unexpected correlation between the enigmatic world of GMOs and the curious quest for digital desktop adornments. In a delightful dance of statistical significance, our results pirouetted hand-in-hand with the previous studies, demonstrating a harmonious alignment in the pursuit of agricultural and technological insights.

Just as the intertwining vines of GMO cotton reach towards the sky, our results reach towards a new understanding of the interconnectedness between seemingly unrelated phenomena. The substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and the impressive r-squared value of 0.8406383 unveiled a compelling association that tickled the fancies of both agricultural enthusiasts and digital decor aficionados. This remarkable correlation, akin to discovering a needle in a haystack of data, lent weight to the notion that statistical quirks often hide in the most unexpected places.

It is as if our data, much like the lyrics of an intriguing song, whispered a tale of the hidden harmony between the agricultural domains of GMO cotton and the digital nooks and crannies of desktop backgrounds. The p-value of < 0.01 acted as a resounding crescendo, emphasizing the unmistakable significance of this connection, leaving little room for doubt in the symphony of statistical relevance.

As we contemplate the implications of this amusing correlation, we are compelled to acknowledge the tantalizing enigma of human curiosity. The collective yearning for novelty and aesthetic appeal, whether it be in the nuanced hues of genetically modified cotton or the kaleidoscopic array of digital desktop backgrounds, reveals the whimsical nuances of the human psyche. This dalliance with unconventional connections serves as a charming reminder that the pursuit of knowledge can lead us through unexpected detours, yielding delightful insights into the seemingly disparate realms of agriculture and technology.

In conclusion, our research revels in the joy of discovery, celebrating the playful quirks of statistical analysis, and the delightful serendipity of uncovering hidden connections in the vast expanse of data. The unexpected bond between GMO cotton and Google searches for desktop backgrounds serves as a testament to the delightful caprices of research, shedding light on the delightful surprises that await those who dare to delve into the mercurial world of statistical exploration.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of 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]]
"Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The fascinating and often bizarre world of scientific research sometimes leads us down unexpected paths. In this study, we aim to explore the quirky and unexpected connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." While one might initially assume these two realms to be entirely unrelated, our investigation reveals a surprisingly strong correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and the digital quest for aesthetically pleasing desktop adornments.
Our choice of analogy for the research title - "Genetically Modified Oddities" - reflects the offbeat and enigmatic nature of the relationship we seek to illuminate. Much like the whimsical realm of desktop background designs and the quirky world of GMOs, this research will take readers on an engaging journey through unexpected correlations, statistical mysteries, and perhaps a few delightfully odd puns along the way.
The utilization of genetically modified cotton has been a subject of fervent debate and scrutiny in agricultural and environmental circles. Simultaneously, the intrigues of internet search behavior and the quirks of popular digital adornments have captivated the fascination of technologists and social observers. By forging a bridge between these seemingly disparate domains, we hope to add a touch of whimsy to the staid world of agricultural research and statistical analysis.
This study, which mineralizes Google Trends search data from 2007 to 2022 and employs USDA data on GMO cotton adoption, aims to unmask the peculiar relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. As we embark on this research odyssey, one can expect statistical nitty-gritty, agricultural insights, and, quite possibly, a touch of good-natured scientific whimsy. So fasten your seatbelts, dear readers, as we embark on this peculiar yet promising quest to shed light on the cotton connection between GMOs and goofy Google searches!

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data gathered from USDA and Google Trends yielded some rather intriguing results. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background."
The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 indicated a robust positive relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the level of public interest in jazzing up digital desktops. This correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8406383, suggesting that a substantial proportion (approximately 84%) of the variation in Google searches for "desktop background" could be explained by the adoption of GMO cotton. Moreover, the p-value of < 0.01 indicated that this relationship was highly statistically significant, leaving little room for skepticism about the strength of the observed association.
While such a strong correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a cow in a cotton field, our results unmistakably illustrate the surprising interconnectedness between these seemingly disparate realms. Fig. 1 depicts the scatterplot, providing a visual representation of the striking correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the popularity of desktop background searches.
This substantial correlation suggests that perhaps there is a collective yearning for a bit of color and novelty in our lives, whether it be in the agricultural landscape or on our computer screens. It appears that both GMO cotton and digital desktop décor share a common thread of captivating the curious minds of the masses.
This unexpected connection between GMOs and Google searches for desktop backgrounds highlights the whimsical nuances of statistical analysis, reminding us that even the most unrelated variables can share an uncanny bond when scrutinized under the lens of rigorous research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 between GMO cotton adoption and Google searches for "desktop background" indicates a surprisingly robust relationship, akin to finding a needle in a haystack, or perhaps a non-GMO crop in a genetically modified field! The high statistical significance of this association, with a p-value of < 0.01, leaves little room to doubt the whimsical connection between these seemingly disparate realms. It appears that GMO cotton and digital desktop décor share a curious bond that defies the conventional boundaries of agricultural and technological domains.

The substantial r-squared value of 0.8406383 suggests that approximately 84% of the variation in desktop background searches can be explained by the adoption of GMO cotton, highlighting the captivating influence of agricultural oddities on our digital adornments. The visual representation in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this uncanny correlation, serving as a striking reminder that even in the world of scientific research, surprises and peculiar connections abound.

This study has brought to light the unexpected quirks and amusing interplay of two seemingly unrelated phenomena, inviting us to ponder the whimsical mysteries of statistical analysis and the broader tapestry of human curiosity. It seems that our quest for captivating desktop backgrounds is not merely confined to the digital realm but is inexplicably entwined with the fascinating world of genetically modified cotton.

In light of these findings, it becomes increasingly apparent that no further research in this peculiar area is warranted. It appears that the connection between GMO use in cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background' has been thoroughly illuminated, leaving us with a whimsical and statistically significant surprise that defies conventional wisdom in both agricultural and digital landscapes.


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 Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Genetic Quirkology


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 Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Whimsical Agricultural Genetics


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 Genetically Modified Oddities: The Cotton Connection Between GMOs and Goofy Google Searches with an abstract of This study delves into the peculiar relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the frequency of Google searches for "desktop background." Using USDA data on GMO cotton adoption and Google Trends search metrics from 2007 to 2022, our research team uncovered a striking correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9168633 and p < 0.01 suggest a robust connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our findings provide an amusing insight into the whimsical world of GMOs and digital desktop decor, yielding surprising implications for both agricultural and technological landscapes.

ChatGPT:

Genetically modified organisms, GMO cotton cultivation, Google search trends, desktop background searches, USDA data, GMO adoption, cotton production, correlation coefficient, Google Trends, agricultural implications, technological landscape.

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

GMO use in cotton
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in Other States 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

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

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'desktop background'

Correlation r = 0.9168633 (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 = 0.8406383 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 84.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'desktop background') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton) over the 16 years from 2007 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.9E-7. 0.0000005895110935806717000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.92 in 5.9E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,696,321 random variables You don't actually need 1 million 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 15 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 15 because we have two variables measured over a period of 16 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.

[ 0.77, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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


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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
2007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
GMO use in cotton (GMO cotton %)27222424212453103322224
Google searches for 'desktop background' (Rel. search volume)81.833386.575.333366.166760.333354.7546.166741.916738.833330.583326.7523.916722.416724.752022.25




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([27,22,24,24,21,24,5,3,10,3,3,2,2,2,2,4,])
array_2 = np.array([81.8333,86.5,75.3333,66.1667,60.3333,54.75,46.1667,41.9167,38.8333,30.5833,26.75,23.9167,22.4167,24.75,20,22.25,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'desktop background'"

# 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 correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!


Correlation ID: 1371 · Black Variable ID: 777 · Red Variable ID: 1462
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0