Spurious correlation #1,525 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The distance between Neptune and Mercury and the second variable is Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The chart goes from 1987 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The distance between Neptune and Mercury and the second variable is Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The chart goes from 1987 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the space between Neptune and Mercury shrunk, their gravitational tug-of-war disrupted Earth's magnetic field. This led to an increase in alien abductions, and it turns out these extraterrestrial tourists have a penchant for intergalactic deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Talk about outer space conservation gone wrong!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that encapsulates the vast expanse of the Brazilian Amazon, with towering trees reaching towards the sky, creating a lush and dense forest canopy. In the distant background, capture the tiny, remote planet of Mercury as a mere speck, with the distant presence of Neptune emphasizing the vast scale of our solar system. Let the richness of the Amazon and the insignificance of the planets against its grandeur be the focal point. 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: The distance between Neptune and Mercury and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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: A TIME magazine cover image a Polaroid photo Psychedelic Cyberpunk Cybernetic art
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 The distance between Neptune and Mercury and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vast expanse of the Brazilian Amazon, towering trees stretch towards the sky, a lush forest canopy covering the land as far as the eye can see. At the same time, far beyond the horizon, the tiny planet of Mercury looks like a speck in the distance, with Neptune appearing even farther away, reminding us of the incredible scale of our solar system.

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 vast expanse of the Brazilian Amazon, towering trees stretch towards the sky, a lush forest canopy covering the land as far as the eye can see. At the same time, far beyond the horizon, the tiny planet of Mercury looks like a speck in the distance, with Neptune appearing even farther away, reminding us of the incredible scale of our solar system. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that encapsulates the vast expanse of the Brazilian Amazon, with towering trees reaching towards the sky, creating a lush and dense forest canopy. In the distant background, capture the tiny, remote planet of Mercury as a mere speck, with the distant presence of Neptune emphasizing the vast scale of our solar system. Let the richness of the Amazon and the insignificance of the planets against its grandeur be the focal point.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 The distance between Neptune and Mercury caused Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon

The Journal of Planetary Proximity and Ecological Enigmas

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} 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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The distance between Neptune and Mercury and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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 the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the cosmic and earthly realms to investigate the peculiar relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Our research team embraced the challenge of connecting astrological phenomena with environmental changes, aiming to bridge the gap between celestial bodies and terrestrial ecosystems. Despite the astronomical nature of our inquiry, we remained grounded in the rigorous analysis of data, refraining from letting our hypotheses "planet" away.

Utilizing data acquired from Astropy and Mongabay, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 1987 to 2022. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and p < 0.01, signifying a remarkably strong relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It appears that even the cosmic dance of planets may have a "tree-mendous" impact on our earthly rainforests.

As we navigate through the celestial and terrestrial realms, our findings prompt us to contemplate the intricate interplay between planetary positions and environmental conditions on Earth. So, the next time someone remarks on planetary alignments, we may just be pondering their connection to the preservation of Earth's forests. As they say, "it's all about that space, 'bout that space, no deforestation!"

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intricate web of interconnected systems in our universe never fails to captivate the curious minds of researchers and enthusiasts alike. From the celestial dance of planets to the delicate balance of ecosystems on our own planet, there seems to be an underlying thread weaving them together. In our quest to unravel these cosmic connections, we turn our attention to the relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It seems that in the vast expanse of space, the motions of celestial bodies may hold sway over the fate of earthly landscapes.
As we embark on this cosmic eco-adventure, we are reminded of a classic dad joke: "Why don't we ever tell secrets on Jupiter? Because it has too much 'atmosphere'!" This lighthearted jest serves as a gentle reminder that even in the realm of academia, a good pun can be the star of the show.
Our investigation into this celestial-terrestrial correlation necessitates an interdisciplinary approach that marries astrophysical data with environmental indicators. While some may view this as a leap from the heavens to the rainforest, our team firmly believes that understanding the celestial context may shed light on earthly phenomena. After all, "you can't make interstellar connections without a little Neptunian intervention!"
With the aid of data procured from astrophysical databases and environmental repositories, our analysis endeavors to untangle the enigmatic relationship between planetary distances and forest cover. Unveiling such connections not only expands our understanding of the cosmos but also reminds us of the delicate balance between the infinite expanse of space and the finite resources of our planet. It's a cosmic ballet, where Neptune and Mercury may be doing the tango with Brazilian rainforests from afar!
The continuous debate on the role of celestial phenomena in shaping terrestrial ecosystems raises eyebrows and telescopes alike. Yet, as scientists, we remain resolute in our pursuit of knowledge, diligently navigating the line between fact and fancy. As they say, "the truth is out there, but sometimes it's hiding behind a planet or two!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In their study "Celestial Bodies and Terrestrial Terrains: An Investigation of Planetary Distances and Environmental Impact," Smith and colleagues venture into the uncharted territory of cosmic influences on Earth's ecosystems. They analyze a multitude of planetary positions and their potential correlation with environmental indicators, shedding light on the profound interconnections that may extend far beyond our atmosphere. However, they failed to acknowledge the potential punny relationship between "Neptune" and "treeptune."

Doe and colleagues, in "The Cosmic Choreography of Planetary Orbits and Terrestrial Trends," offer a comprehensive exploration of the interplay between planetary distances and environmental dynamics. Their rigorous statistical analyses present compelling evidence of a significant relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and terrestrial phenomena, prompting both scientists and playwrights to ponder the age-old question, "To be or not to be (in orbital resonance)?"

Jones et al., in "Planetary Proximity and Rainforest Resilience: An Interstellar Investigation," delve into the intricacies of planetary proximity and its potential repercussions on rainforest ecosystems. Their findings suggest a compelling association between celestial trajectories and earthly phenomena, leading us to wonder if celestial bodies are simply "branching out" to influence our planet's flora.

Drawing from the expansive realms of non-fiction literature, we turn our attention to acclaimed works such as "Astrophysics for People in a Hurry" by Neil deGrasse Tyson and "The Hidden Life of Trees" by Peter Wohlleben. While one explores the mysteries of the cosmos and the other reveals the secrets of the forest, both offer insights that may intertwine in unexpected ways – perhaps akin to a "divine comedy" of cosmic proportions.

Venturing further into the literary cosmos, we encounter fictional narratives that tantalize the imagination and spark curiosity. From Arthur C. Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey" to H.G. Wells' "The War of the Worlds," these works ignite contemplation on the potential interstellar influences that may permeate our terrestrial realm. After all, who's to say that Jupiter's moons can't inspire tales of "wooden" spaceships in the Amazon?

In a departure from traditional academic sources, our relentless pursuit of knowledge led us through unconventional paths, including perusing the backs of shampoo bottles for any cosmic revelations. Alas, amidst the lather and rinse, the only correlation we found was the soothing "forest rain" fragrance – which, although delightful, did little to advance our understanding of celestial environmental impacts.

As we reflect on the rich tapestry of literature, both real and imagined, we cannot help but be reminded of the words of the great Carl Sagan, who aptly summarized our sentiments, "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known – perhaps even in the unlikeliest of places, like the distant orbits of planets and the verdant expanses of the Amazon."

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The distance between Neptune and Mercury and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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 Caclculated using Astropy and Mongabay . You used data from 1987 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]]
"Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the cosmic and earthly realms to investigate the peculiar relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Our research team embraced the challenge of connecting astrological phenomena with environmental changes, aiming to bridge the gap between celestial bodies and terrestrial ecosystems. Despite the astronomical nature of our inquiry, we remained grounded in the rigorous analysis of data, refraining from letting our hypotheses "planet" away.

Utilizing data acquired from Astropy and Mongabay, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 1987 to 2022. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and p < 0.01, signifying a remarkably strong relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It appears that even the cosmic dance of planets may have a "tree-mendous" impact on our earthly rainforests.

As we navigate through the celestial and terrestrial realms, our findings prompt us to contemplate the intricate interplay between planetary positions and environmental conditions on Earth. So, the next time someone remarks on planetary alignments, we may just be pondering their connection to the preservation of Earth's forests. As they say, "it's all about that space, 'bout that space, no deforestation!"

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intricate web of interconnected systems in our universe never fails to captivate the curious minds of researchers and enthusiasts alike. From the celestial dance of planets to the delicate balance of ecosystems on our own planet, there seems to be an underlying thread weaving them together. In our quest to unravel these cosmic connections, we turn our attention to the relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It seems that in the vast expanse of space, the motions of celestial bodies may hold sway over the fate of earthly landscapes.
As we embark on this cosmic eco-adventure, we are reminded of a classic dad joke: "Why don't we ever tell secrets on Jupiter? Because it has too much 'atmosphere'!" This lighthearted jest serves as a gentle reminder that even in the realm of academia, a good pun can be the star of the show.
Our investigation into this celestial-terrestrial correlation necessitates an interdisciplinary approach that marries astrophysical data with environmental indicators. While some may view this as a leap from the heavens to the rainforest, our team firmly believes that understanding the celestial context may shed light on earthly phenomena. After all, "you can't make interstellar connections without a little Neptunian intervention!"
With the aid of data procured from astrophysical databases and environmental repositories, our analysis endeavors to untangle the enigmatic relationship between planetary distances and forest cover. Unveiling such connections not only expands our understanding of the cosmos but also reminds us of the delicate balance between the infinite expanse of space and the finite resources of our planet. It's a cosmic ballet, where Neptune and Mercury may be doing the tango with Brazilian rainforests from afar!
The continuous debate on the role of celestial phenomena in shaping terrestrial ecosystems raises eyebrows and telescopes alike. Yet, as scientists, we remain resolute in our pursuit of knowledge, diligently navigating the line between fact and fancy. As they say, "the truth is out there, but sometimes it's hiding behind a planet or two!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic correlation between planetary positions and terrestrial ecosystems, our research team undertook a multifaceted methodology that ventured into both the celestial and earthly realms. First, we obtained data on the distances between Neptune and Mercury, referring to their positions relative to Earth, from Astropy, bringing a whole new meaning to the term "interplanetary data collection." This cosmic pursuit led us to gather data from 1987 to 2022, a period encompassing significant environmental changes on Earth and, undoubtedly, a few planetary rotations for good measure.

With the planetary data in hand, we turned our attention to mapping the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon using information sourced from Mongabay. This entailed employing an intricate dance of geographic information systems, remote sensing technologies, and statistical analyses, creating a mosaic of Earth-bound data that surreptitiously twirls with celestial datasets in a planetary polonaise.

Our analysis centered on computing the correlation coefficient between the distance between Neptune and Mercury over time and the corresponding forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Much like a cosmic tango, these calculations required meticulous attention to detail and the finesse of statistical techniques to elucidate any rhythmic patterns in the data. And let me assure you, there are few dances more captivating than the statistical two-step.

Furthermore, in a bid to account for potential confounding factors, we also performed a series of multivariate regression analyses, adjusting for variables such as temperature, precipitation, and human intervention. This served as a safeguard against attributing planetary peculiarities to any earthly disruptions, ensuring we were not assigning blame to Neptune and Mercury for any forest misfortunes unjustly. After all, in the realm of planetary conservation, fairness reigns supreme!

Lastly, to validate the robustness of our findings, we conducted a series of sensitivity analyses and cross-validation procedures, ensuring that our results remained stalwart in the face of fluctuations in the data. This solidified the credibility of our cosmic-earthly correlation, providing an assurance that our celestial findings were not mere mirages but tangible cosmic connections with terrestrial implications. As they say, "the proof is in the planetary pudding!"

In summary, our methodology sought to harmonize the celestial with the terrestrial, orchestrating a symphony of data collection, statistical maneuvers, and analytical finesse to uncover the celestial-terrestrial duet hidden within the depths of our research. All in all, from data collection to analysis, we traversed the cosmic and earthly realms, bringing new meaning to the phrase "reaching for the stars" in our pursuit of understanding the celestial impact on our earthly ecosystems.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The distance between Neptune and Mercury and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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]]
"Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the cosmic and earthly realms to investigate the peculiar relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Our research team embraced the challenge of connecting astrological phenomena with environmental changes, aiming to bridge the gap between celestial bodies and terrestrial ecosystems. Despite the astronomical nature of our inquiry, we remained grounded in the rigorous analysis of data, refraining from letting our hypotheses "planet" away.

Utilizing data acquired from Astropy and Mongabay, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 1987 to 2022. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and p < 0.01, signifying a remarkably strong relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It appears that even the cosmic dance of planets may have a "tree-mendous" impact on our earthly rainforests.

As we navigate through the celestial and terrestrial realms, our findings prompt us to contemplate the intricate interplay between planetary positions and environmental conditions on Earth. So, the next time someone remarks on planetary alignments, we may just be pondering their connection to the preservation of Earth's forests. As they say, "it's all about that space, 'bout that space, no deforestation!"

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In their study "Celestial Bodies and Terrestrial Terrains: An Investigation of Planetary Distances and Environmental Impact," Smith and colleagues venture into the uncharted territory of cosmic influences on Earth's ecosystems. They analyze a multitude of planetary positions and their potential correlation with environmental indicators, shedding light on the profound interconnections that may extend far beyond our atmosphere. However, they failed to acknowledge the potential punny relationship between "Neptune" and "treeptune."
Doe and colleagues, in "The Cosmic Choreography of Planetary Orbits and Terrestrial Trends," offer a comprehensive exploration of the interplay between planetary distances and environmental dynamics. Their rigorous statistical analyses present compelling evidence of a significant relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and terrestrial phenomena, prompting both scientists and playwrights to ponder the age-old question, "To be or not to be (in orbital resonance)?"
Jones et al., in "Planetary Proximity and Rainforest Resilience: An Interstellar Investigation," delve into the intricacies of planetary proximity and its potential repercussions on rainforest ecosystems. Their findings suggest a compelling association between celestial trajectories and earthly phenomena, leading us to wonder if celestial bodies are simply "branching out" to influence our planet's flora.
Drawing from the expansive realms of non-fiction literature, we turn our attention to acclaimed works such as "Astrophysics for People in a Hurry" by Neil deGrasse Tyson and "The Hidden Life of Trees" by Peter Wohlleben. While one explores the mysteries of the cosmos and the other reveals the secrets of the forest, both offer insights that may intertwine in unexpected ways – perhaps akin to a "divine comedy" of cosmic proportions.
Venturing further into the literary cosmos, we encounter fictional narratives that tantalize the imagination and spark curiosity. From Arthur C. Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey" to H.G. Wells' "The War of the Worlds," these works ignite contemplation on the potential interstellar influences that may permeate our terrestrial realm. After all, who's to say that Jupiter's moons can't inspire tales of "wooden" spaceships in the Amazon?
In a departure from traditional academic sources, our relentless pursuit of knowledge led us through unconventional paths, including perusing the backs of shampoo bottles for any cosmic revelations. Alas, amidst the lather and rinse, the only correlation we found was the soothing "forest rain" fragrance – which, although delightful, did little to advance our understanding of celestial environmental impacts.
As we reflect on the rich tapestry of literature, both real and imagined, we cannot help but be reminded of the words of the great Carl Sagan, who aptly summarized our sentiments, "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known – perhaps even in the unlikeliest of places, like the distant orbits of planets and the verdant expanses of the Amazon."

[[RESULTS]]
Upon conducting our analysis, we uncovered a striking correlation between the distance separating Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon for the time period spanning from 1987 to 2022. Our statistical investigation revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9754142, indicating a robust positive relationship between planetary distances and forest cover. The r-squared value of 0.9514329 further substantiates the strength of this association, demonstrating that approximately 95% of the variation in forest cover can be explained by the distance between these celestial bodies. With a p-value less than 0.01, we can confidently reject the null hypothesis and affirm the statistical significance of this correlation.
Fig. 1 displays the scatterplot showcasing the substantial correlation observed between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The points on the plot align themselves with the precision of a cosmic symphony, illustrating the pronounced relationship between planetary distances and forest cover.
It seems that even the cosmic forces at play in our solar system may exert a palpable influence on the terrestrial ecosystems of the Brazilian Amazon. Perhaps we should start considering interplanetary distances in our environmental impact assessments – after all, it could be the key to unlocking nature's celestial secrets.
Despite the astronomical nature of our findings, we remain firmly grounded in the empirical evidence and cautiously delineate the boundaries between astrological intrigue and scientific inquiry. As we navigate through this celestial-terrestrial junction, we can't help but marvel at the cosmic choreography that seems to sway the verdant expanses of the Amazon. It's as if the planets are whispering to the trees, "Neptune, stop making waves, you're causing deforestation!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

In this study, we have ventured into the cosmic and ecological spheres to unravel the enigmatic relationship between the distance separating Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Our findings have borne fruit, illuminating a compelling correlation, as evidenced by the robust correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and a p-value less than 0.01. It appears that the celestial ballet of planets may indeed hold sway over the terrestrial ecosystems, prompting us to ponder the profound implications of planetary positions on Earth's verdant expanses.

Our results align harmoniously with prior research by Smith and colleagues, who explored the influence of planetary positions on environmental indicators. While their work did not explicitly acknowledge the punny relationship between "Neptune" and "treeptune," our findings substantiate the potential interstellar influence on terrestrial flora. It seems that even in the vast expanse of the cosmos, puns find a way to "orbit" their way into our research endeavors.

Furthermore, the study by Doe and colleagues, which spotlighted the cosmic choreography of planetary orbits and terrestrial trends, provided insightful evidence of a significant relationship between planetary distances and terrestrial phenomena. In this vein, our research not only corroborates their findings but also adds a celestial twist, bringing planetary distances into the spotlight of terrestrial environmental dynamics. One might say that our research has boldly gone where no forest cover study has gone before – to the far reaches of our solar system.

The literature review also ventured into unconventional realms, from fictional narratives to the backs of shampoo bottles. While the pursuit of cosmic revelations in the mundane may yield little more than fragrant musings, our study has steered the discourse to more astronomical matters, revealing the cosmic symphony that seems to echo in the verdant expanses of the Amazon. Who knew that planetary distances could hold the key to nature's celestial secrets? It's almost as if the planets are orchestrating a celestial cacophony that reverberates through the Amazon – a cosmic melody of ecological relevance.

As we saunter through this celestial-terrestrial junction, our research bids us to contemplate the intricate interplay between planetary positions and environmental conditions on Earth. It beckons us to envision planetary distances not merely as astronomical figures in dusty textbooks but as silent influencers in Earth's ecological tapestry. After all, who's to say that the celestial bodies aren't lending a helping hand – or should we say, a helping branch – to the preservation of Earth's forests?

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The distance between Neptune and Mercury and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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]]
"Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the cosmic and earthly realms to investigate the peculiar relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Our research team embraced the challenge of connecting astrological phenomena with environmental changes, aiming to bridge the gap between celestial bodies and terrestrial ecosystems. Despite the astronomical nature of our inquiry, we remained grounded in the rigorous analysis of data, refraining from letting our hypotheses "planet" away.

Utilizing data acquired from Astropy and Mongabay, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 1987 to 2022. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and p < 0.01, signifying a remarkably strong relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It appears that even the cosmic dance of planets may have a "tree-mendous" impact on our earthly rainforests.

As we navigate through the celestial and terrestrial realms, our findings prompt us to contemplate the intricate interplay between planetary positions and environmental conditions on Earth. So, the next time someone remarks on planetary alignments, we may just be pondering their connection to the preservation of Earth's forests. As they say, "it's all about that space, 'bout that space, no deforestation!"

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intricate web of interconnected systems in our universe never fails to captivate the curious minds of researchers and enthusiasts alike. From the celestial dance of planets to the delicate balance of ecosystems on our own planet, there seems to be an underlying thread weaving them together. In our quest to unravel these cosmic connections, we turn our attention to the relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It seems that in the vast expanse of space, the motions of celestial bodies may hold sway over the fate of earthly landscapes.
As we embark on this cosmic eco-adventure, we are reminded of a classic dad joke: "Why don't we ever tell secrets on Jupiter? Because it has too much 'atmosphere'!" This lighthearted jest serves as a gentle reminder that even in the realm of academia, a good pun can be the star of the show.
Our investigation into this celestial-terrestrial correlation necessitates an interdisciplinary approach that marries astrophysical data with environmental indicators. While some may view this as a leap from the heavens to the rainforest, our team firmly believes that understanding the celestial context may shed light on earthly phenomena. After all, "you can't make interstellar connections without a little Neptunian intervention!"
With the aid of data procured from astrophysical databases and environmental repositories, our analysis endeavors to untangle the enigmatic relationship between planetary distances and forest cover. Unveiling such connections not only expands our understanding of the cosmos but also reminds us of the delicate balance between the infinite expanse of space and the finite resources of our planet. It's a cosmic ballet, where Neptune and Mercury may be doing the tango with Brazilian rainforests from afar!
The continuous debate on the role of celestial phenomena in shaping terrestrial ecosystems raises eyebrows and telescopes alike. Yet, as scientists, we remain resolute in our pursuit of knowledge, diligently navigating the line between fact and fancy. As they say, "the truth is out there, but sometimes it's hiding behind a planet or two!"

[[RESULTS]]
Upon conducting our analysis, we uncovered a striking correlation between the distance separating Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon for the time period spanning from 1987 to 2022. Our statistical investigation revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9754142, indicating a robust positive relationship between planetary distances and forest cover. The r-squared value of 0.9514329 further substantiates the strength of this association, demonstrating that approximately 95% of the variation in forest cover can be explained by the distance between these celestial bodies. With a p-value less than 0.01, we can confidently reject the null hypothesis and affirm the statistical significance of this correlation.
Fig. 1 displays the scatterplot showcasing the substantial correlation observed between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The points on the plot align themselves with the precision of a cosmic symphony, illustrating the pronounced relationship between planetary distances and forest cover.
It seems that even the cosmic forces at play in our solar system may exert a palpable influence on the terrestrial ecosystems of the Brazilian Amazon. Perhaps we should start considering interplanetary distances in our environmental impact assessments – after all, it could be the key to unlocking nature's celestial secrets.
Despite the astronomical nature of our findings, we remain firmly grounded in the empirical evidence and cautiously delineate the boundaries between astrological intrigue and scientific inquiry. As we navigate through this celestial-terrestrial junction, we can't help but marvel at the cosmic choreography that seems to sway the verdant expanses of the Amazon. It's as if the planets are whispering to the trees, "Neptune, stop making waves, you're causing deforestation!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research unearths an unexpectedly robust relationship between the distance separating Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and the remarkably high r-squared value of 0.9514329 underscore the profound influence of celestial distances on earthly ecosystems. It appears that even in the grand theater of the cosmos, the movements of planets can orchestrate the fortunes of our terrestrial rainforests. As we contemplate the implications of this unearthly connection, it seems that we may need to expand our environmental conservation efforts to include a celestial dimension. After all, to address deforestation, we might just need to reach for the stars!

In this cosmic exploration, we cannot overlook the inherent humor in perceiving interplanetary distances as potential influencers of terrestrial phenomena. It's as if the planets are trying to remind us that, in the game of environmental conservation, "Neptune's distance is just one small step for a planet, but one giant leap for rainforest-kind!"

With the clarity of our findings and the tantalizing prospects they present, we assert confidently that further investigative voyages into these celestial-terrestrial connections are unwarranted. Yes, you read that right – we're shutting this topic down faster than Earth's rotation! It seems that when it comes to the distance between Neptune and Mercury and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon, the evidence speaks for itself, loud and clear. No need to go "planet"-hopping for more data; our cosmic expedition has come to a fittingly celestial conclusion.

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 Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Planetary Proximity and Ecological Enigmas

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 Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Cosmic Conservation Consortium

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 Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon with an abstract of In this study, we delve into the cosmic and earthly realms to investigate the peculiar relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Our research team embraced the challenge of connecting astrological phenomena with environmental changes, aiming to bridge the gap between celestial bodies and terrestrial ecosystems. Despite the astronomical nature of our inquiry, we remained grounded in the rigorous analysis of data, refraining from letting our hypotheses "planet" away.
Utilizing data acquired from Astropy and Mongabay, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 1987 to 2022. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9754142 and p < 0.01, signifying a remarkably strong relationship between the distance between Neptune and Mercury and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. It appears that even the cosmic dance of planets may have a "tree-mendous" impact on our earthly rainforests.
As we navigate through the celestial and terrestrial realms, our findings prompt us to contemplate the intricate interplay between planetary positions and environmental conditions on Earth. So, the next time someone remarks on planetary alignments, we may just be pondering their connection to the preservation of Earth's forests. As they say, "it's all about that space, 'bout that space, no deforestation!

ChatGPT:

planetary distances, forest cover, Brazilian Amazon, Neptune, Mercury, Astropy, Mongabay, environmental changes, celestial bodies, terrestrial ecosystems, correlation coefficient, data analysis

*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

The distance between Neptune and Mercury
Detailed data title: The average distance between Neptune and Mercury as measured on the first day of each month
Source: Caclculated using Astropy
Additional Info: ^{See full details} I wrote a Python script using Astropy to calculate the distance between the named planets on the first day of each month for every year.

See what else correlates with The distance between Neptune and Mercury

Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon
Detailed data title: Estimated Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon
Source: Mongabay
See what else correlates with Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon

Correlation r = 0.9754142 (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 = 0.9514329 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 95.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The distance between Neptune and Mercury) over the 36 years from 1987 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 6.5E-24.^Show 0.0000000000000000000000064717
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.98 in 6.5E-22% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 154,518,905,388,074,214,096,896 random variables^Note You don't actually need 154 sextillion 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 35 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 35 because we have two variables measured over a period of 36 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.95, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	1987	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022
The distance between Neptune and Mercury (Planetary distance (AU))	30.1155	30.1045	30.0908	30.1053	30.1066	30.1072	30.0836	30.0759	30.0625	30.0563	30.0694	30.0674	30.0592	30.0315	30.0236	30.0005	30.0036	30.0141	30.0179	30.0073	29.9926	29.9826	29.9655	29.9764	29.9793	29.9857	29.9631	29.9538	29.9365	29.9238	29.9383	29.9468	29.9531	29.9382	29.9368	29.9144
Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon (Sq. KM)	3744570	3723520	3705750	3692020	3680990	3667200	3652310	3637410	3608350	3590190	3576960	3559580	3542320	3524100	3505930	3484280	3458880	3431110	3412100	3397810	3386160	3373250	3365790	3358790	3352370	3347800	3341910	3336900	3330690	3322800	3315850	3308310	3298550	3290120	3279650	3268050

Why this works

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.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note 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.
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^Note 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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([30.1155,30.1045,30.0908,30.1053,30.1066,30.1072,30.0836,30.0759,30.0625,30.0563,30.0694,30.0674,30.0592,30.0315,30.0236,30.0005,30.0036,30.0141,30.0179,30.0073,29.9926,29.9826,29.9655,29.9764,29.9793,29.9857,29.9631,29.9538,29.9365,29.9238,29.9383,29.9468,29.9531,29.9382,29.9368,29.9144,])
array_2 = np.array([3744570,3723520,3705750,3692020,3680990,3667200,3652310,3637410,3608350,3590190,3576960,3559580,3542320,3524100,3505930,3484280,3458880,3431110,3412100,3397810,3386160,3373250,3365790,3358790,3352370,3347800,3341910,3336900,3330690,3322800,3315850,3308310,3298550,3290120,3279650,3268050,])
array_1_name = "The distance between Neptune and Mercury"
array_2_name = "Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon"

# 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. ^Note 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:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only The distance between Neptune and Mercury
Line chart for only Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Out of This World Connections: Exploring the Relationship Between Planetary Distances and Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating skills are top-notch!

Correlation ID: 1525 · Black Variable ID: 1954 · Red Variable ID: 372


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: