about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,834 · 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 corn grown in Texas and the second variable is US birth rates of triplets or more.  The chart goes from 2005 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Texas corn lost its GMO superpowers, it could only manage to fertilize one kernel at a time. Less GM corn meant fewer corny pick-up lines for the storks to deliver.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a TIME magazine cover featuring a picturesque Texas cornfield stretching into the distance, bathed in golden sunlight. In the foreground, a happy family stands, holding a set of adorable triplets, each wearing bright and colorful outfits. The parents beam with pride as they gaze at their children, basking in the warmth of the sun. The image should exude a sense of joy and tranquility, capturing the beauty of family togetherness amidst the endless fields of genetically modified corn. 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 corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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: Cyberpunk Charcoal Whimsical illustration A TIME magazine cover image Celtic 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 GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vast Texas cornfield, rows of genetically modified corn plants stretch across the landscape. Above the field, a joyful family of triplet babies is seen being cradled in their parents' arms, with the bright sun shining down on them.

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 Texas cornfield, rows of genetically modified corn plants stretch across the landscape. Above the field, a joyful family of triplet babies is seen being cradled in their parents' arms, with the bright sun shining down on them. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a TIME magazine cover featuring a picturesque Texas cornfield stretching into the distance, bathed in golden sunlight. In the foreground, a happy family stands, holding a set of adorable triplets, each wearing bright and colorful outfits. The parents beam with pride as they gaze at their children, basking in the warmth of the sun. The image should exude a sense of joy and tranquility, capturing the beauty of family togetherness amidst the endless fields of genetically modified corn.

*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 corn grown in Texas caused US birth rates of triplets or more to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Genetically Modified Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

The Journal of Agronomical Advancements

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from USDA and CDC to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 and p < 0.01 for 2005 to 2021.

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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As we delve into the labyrinth of empirical inquiry, we embark on a quest to untangle the enigmatic web of connections between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn and the birth rates of triplets or more. The intersection of agriculture and fecundity may seem all ears and sprouted with perplexity, but our research aims to cultivate a deeper understanding of this unlikely correlation.

This study sprouted from a kernel of curiosity - the notion that the cornucopia of genetically modified corn in Texas may be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the United States. With the burgeoning debate around the safety and impact of GMOs, uncovering any potential links to reproductive outcomes could peel back the husk of a fascinating discovery.

As we navigate through the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we are reminded that correlation does not imply causation - but oh, how tempting it is to speculate about the potential mechanisms at play! Could it be that GMOs are triggering a fertility frenzy, or is this simply a kernel of statistical happenstance? Our findings promise to plant the seeds of thought-provoking discourse as we embark on this intellectual journey through the fields of agriculture and obstetrics.

It is our fervent hope that this research will not only cultivate a deeper understanding of the potential impact of GMOs on fertility but also provide an ear of corny puns and lighthearted statistics to nourish the minds of our esteemed colleagues. So, let us embark on this maize of intrigue with a curious spirit and a healthy dose of scientific humor, for in the world of statistics, sometimes the best discoveries are found amidst the stalks of unexpected correlations.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Genetically Modified Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we delve into the labyrinth of empirical inquiry, we embark on a quest to untangle the enigmatic web of connections between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn and the birth rates of triplets or more. The intersection of agriculture and fecundity may seem all ears and sprouted with perplexity, but our research aims to cultivate a deeper understanding of this unlikely correlation.
This study sprouted from a kernel of curiosity - the notion that the cornucopia of genetically modified corn in Texas may be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the United States. With the burgeoning debate around the safety and impact of GMOs, uncovering any potential links to reproductive outcomes could peel back the husk of a fascinating discovery.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we are reminded that correlation does not imply causation - but oh, how tempting it is to speculate about the potential mechanisms at play! Could it be that GMOs are triggering a fertility frenzy, or is this simply a kernel of statistical happenstance? Our findings promise to plant the seeds of thought-provoking discourse as we embark on this intellectual journey through the fields of agriculture and obstetrics.
It is our fervent hope that this research will not only cultivate a deeper understanding of the potential impact of GMOs on fertility but also provide an ear of corny puns and lighthearted statistics to nourish the minds of our esteemed colleagues. So, let us embark on this maize of intrigue with a curious spirit and a healthy dose of scientific humor, for in the world of statistics, sometimes the best discoveries are found amidst the stalks of unexpected correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The literature on the connection between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn, particularly in Texas, and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States is as rich and varied as a genetically diverse field of maize. A number of serious scholarly studies on this topic have lent their insights to the discourse.

Smith and Doe (2010) examined the prevalence of GMO usage in corn production and its potential impact on reproductive outcomes. Their findings highlighted the complex interactions between genetic engineering and fertility, hinting at the possibility of a connection between GMO-laden corn and multiple births. Similarly, Jones et al. (2015) delved into the agricultural landscape of Texas, elucidating the widespread adoption of GMOs and raising questions about the unintended consequences for human fertility.

Moving from the academically rigorous to the thought-provoking realms of non-fiction literature, Pollan's "The Omnivore's Dilemma" (2006) echoes the concerns surrounding GMOs and their widespread integration into our food supply. As we navigate through this literary panorama, one cannot overlook the fictional works that, on the surface, may not seem epidemiological, but harbor deeper connections. In Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" (2003), the implications of genetic manipulation extend beyond dystopian societies, offering a speculative lens through which to view the potential impact of GMOs on reproductive health.

And while the temptation to include unrelated sources grows, I must resist the allure of the absurd. Yet, let it be known that this literature review was not solely based on esteemed scholarly works and influential literary pieces. Some unconventional sources, such as surreptitiously collected grocery store receipts, were also consulted. The margins of these receipts, filled with cryptic codes and enigmatic discounts, teased out data that spoke directly to the heart of our research question. Though the veracity of this approach may be questioned, the correlations were as surprising as the discovery of an ear of corn in the produce section of a hardware store.

In summary, the literature paints a compelling narrative of the potential relationship between GMO-infused corn in Texas and the occurrence of multiple births in the United States. It is through this interdisciplinary exploration that we aim to bring some levity to an otherwise serious inquiry – for in the vast field of statistical analysis, a dash of humor may be the best fertilizer for groundbreaking discoveries.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 CDC . You used data from 2005 to 2021

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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we delve into the labyrinth of empirical inquiry, we embark on a quest to untangle the enigmatic web of connections between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn and the birth rates of triplets or more. The intersection of agriculture and fecundity may seem all ears and sprouted with perplexity, but our research aims to cultivate a deeper understanding of this unlikely correlation.
This study sprouted from a kernel of curiosity - the notion that the cornucopia of genetically modified corn in Texas may be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the United States. With the burgeoning debate around the safety and impact of GMOs, uncovering any potential links to reproductive outcomes could peel back the husk of a fascinating discovery.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we are reminded that correlation does not imply causation - but oh, how tempting it is to speculate about the potential mechanisms at play! Could it be that GMOs are triggering a fertility frenzy, or is this simply a kernel of statistical happenstance? Our findings promise to plant the seeds of thought-provoking discourse as we embark on this intellectual journey through the fields of agriculture and obstetrics.
It is our fervent hope that this research will not only cultivate a deeper understanding of the potential impact of GMOs on fertility but also provide an ear of corny puns and lighthearted statistics to nourish the minds of our esteemed colleagues. So, let us embark on this maize of intrigue with a curious spirit and a healthy dose of scientific humor, for in the world of statistics, sometimes the best discoveries are found amidst the stalks of unexpected correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

As we set out to untangle the convoluted web of GMO-infused corn and its potential influence on multiple births, our research team employed a multifaceted approach to gather and analyze the data. Our data collection involved a thorough examination of corn cultivation practices in Texas, cross-referencing a bushel-load of information from the USDA databases. We carefully plucked kernels of data spanning from 2005 to 2021, ensuring that our sample was as cornprehensive as possible.

To measure the birth rates of triplets or more, we harvested data from the esteemed CDC, meticulously sowing the seeds of statistical rigor to ensure our findings were ripe for analysis. Our approach was carefully husked to account for confounding variables, such as changes in fertility treatments, maternal age, and other agricultural practices that could potentially impact the results. We cultivated a rich dataset, cross-pollinating information from various sources to ensure the robustness of our findings.

After harvesting our data, we employed a rigorous statistical analysis, plowing through the fields of regression modeling to uncover any meaningful associations between GMO-infused corn and multiple births. Our analysis was designed to weed out any spurious correlations and provide a bountiful yield of meaningful insights. We conducted sensitivity analyses to ensure that our results were not merely the result of statistical chaff, but rather represented a significant and cornvincing relationship.

In order to ensure our study was not just a collection of statistical straw, we utilized advanced statistical techniques, such as multivariate regression models and propensity score matching, to control for potential confounding variables. This allowed us to peel back the layers of potential biases and statistically till the soil for any deeper underlying connections between GMO corn and the birth of bundles of joy.

Our approach was not just a mere exercise in statistical threshing, but instead, a concerted effort to dig deep into the fertile fields of agricultural and reproductive data. While these methods may seem a-maize-ing, we believe they were essential to cultivate a cornprehensive understanding of the potential link between GMO corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 CDC .

For the time period 2005 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9251160, r-squared of 0.8558396, 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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As we delve into the labyrinth of empirical inquiry, we embark on a quest to untangle the enigmatic web of connections between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn and the birth rates of triplets or more. The intersection of agriculture and fecundity may seem all ears and sprouted with perplexity, but our research aims to cultivate a deeper understanding of this unlikely correlation.
This study sprouted from a kernel of curiosity - the notion that the cornucopia of genetically modified corn in Texas may be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the United States. With the burgeoning debate around the safety and impact of GMOs, uncovering any potential links to reproductive outcomes could peel back the husk of a fascinating discovery.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we are reminded that correlation does not imply causation - but oh, how tempting it is to speculate about the potential mechanisms at play! Could it be that GMOs are triggering a fertility frenzy, or is this simply a kernel of statistical happenstance? Our findings promise to plant the seeds of thought-provoking discourse as we embark on this intellectual journey through the fields of agriculture and obstetrics.
It is our fervent hope that this research will not only cultivate a deeper understanding of the potential impact of GMOs on fertility but also provide an ear of corny puns and lighthearted statistics to nourish the minds of our esteemed colleagues. So, let us embark on this maize of intrigue with a curious spirit and a healthy dose of scientific humor, for in the world of statistics, sometimes the best discoveries are found amidst the stalks of unexpected correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States from 2005 to 2021. This correlation, signifying a strong positive relationship, had an r-squared value of 0.8558396, further cementing the veracity and robustness of the association. The p-value less than 0.01 indicated a high level of statistical significance, suggesting that this correlation was not merely a statistical fluke but a bona fide revelation.

The results of our study are graphically depicted in Figure 1, a scatterplot that vividly captures the impressive correlation between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn in Texas and the occurrence of multiple births. While we can't help but marvel at the statistical beauty of the correlation, the implications of these findings also warrant earnest consideration and further investigation – a kernel of truth ready to sprout into a field of scientific inquiry.

It may appear corny at first to entertain the notion of genetically modified corn impacting fertility rates, but as we peel back the layers of this unexpected relationship, we uncover a bounty of future research opportunities. The fertile ground of GMO-infused corn in Texas may indeed be sowing more than just grains – it might be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the nation. Our findings invite further discourse on the potential effects of GMOs on reproductive outcomes and offer a compelling entry point for the exploration of this captivating correlation.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The literature on the connection between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn, particularly in Texas, and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States is as rich and varied as a genetically diverse field of maize. A number of serious scholarly studies on this topic have lent their insights to the discourse.
Smith and Doe (2010) examined the prevalence of GMO usage in corn production and its potential impact on reproductive outcomes. Their findings highlighted the complex interactions between genetic engineering and fertility, hinting at the possibility of a connection between GMO-laden corn and multiple births. Similarly, Jones et al. (2015) delved into the agricultural landscape of Texas, elucidating the widespread adoption of GMOs and raising questions about the unintended consequences for human fertility.
Moving from the academically rigorous to the thought-provoking realms of non-fiction literature, Pollan's "The Omnivore's Dilemma" (2006) echoes the concerns surrounding GMOs and their widespread integration into our food supply. As we navigate through this literary panorama, one cannot overlook the fictional works that, on the surface, may not seem epidemiological, but harbor deeper connections. In Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" (2003), the implications of genetic manipulation extend beyond dystopian societies, offering a speculative lens through which to view the potential impact of GMOs on reproductive health.
And while the temptation to include unrelated sources grows, I must resist the allure of the absurd. Yet, let it be known that this literature review was not solely based on esteemed scholarly works and influential literary pieces. Some unconventional sources, such as surreptitiously collected grocery store receipts, were also consulted. The margins of these receipts, filled with cryptic codes and enigmatic discounts, teased out data that spoke directly to the heart of our research question. Though the veracity of this approach may be questioned, the correlations were as surprising as the discovery of an ear of corn in the produce section of a hardware store.
In summary, the literature paints a compelling narrative of the potential relationship between GMO-infused corn in Texas and the occurrence of multiple births in the United States. It is through this interdisciplinary exploration that we aim to bring some levity to an otherwise serious inquiry – for in the vast field of statistical analysis, a dash of humor may be the best fertilizer for groundbreaking discoveries.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States from 2005 to 2021. This correlation, signifying a strong positive relationship, had an r-squared value of 0.8558396, further cementing the veracity and robustness of the association. The p-value less than 0.01 indicated a high level of statistical significance, suggesting that this correlation was not merely a statistical fluke but a bona fide revelation.
The results of our study are graphically depicted in Figure 1, a scatterplot that vividly captures the impressive correlation between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn in Texas and the occurrence of multiple births. While we can't help but marvel at the statistical beauty of the correlation, the implications of these findings also warrant earnest consideration and further investigation – a kernel of truth ready to sprout into a field of scientific inquiry.
It may appear corny at first to entertain the notion of genetically modified corn impacting fertility rates, but as we peel back the layers of this unexpected relationship, we uncover a bounty of future research opportunities. The fertile ground of GMO-infused corn in Texas may indeed be sowing more than just grains – it might be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the nation. Our findings invite further discourse on the potential effects of GMOs on reproductive outcomes and offer a compelling entry point for the exploration of this captivating correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation offer a compelling glimpse into the statistically significant association between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. It is clear that our findings not only support, but also amplify, the existing literature on this intriguing linkage.

The works of Smith and Doe (2010) and Jones et al. (2015) paved the way for our study, laying the groundwork for a deeper exploration of the potential impact of GMO-infused corn on reproductive outcomes. As we reflect on the findings of our research, a corn-ucopia of implications emerges. It is evident that the kernel of truth within these studies has germinated into a robust correlation, demonstrating a remarkable congruence with our own results.

Speaking of literature, the non-traditional sources consulted in our literature review also proved to sow the seeds of unique insights. Though some may deem the use of grocery store receipts as unconventional, the synergy between these data and our findings is as unexpected as stumbling upon an ear of corn in a hardware store. This unorthodox approach, much like a genetic mutation, has yielded unexpected fruits in our analysis.

The statistical significance of the correlation coefficient, coupled with the high r-squared value, illuminates the unmistakable relationship between GMO-infused corn in Texas and the occurrence of multiple births. As we contemplate the implications of these statistics, we must acknowledge that while the connection may seem corny on the surface, its significance cannot be dismissed as mere husk. Our findings are a-maize-ing in their revelation of this rather husk-torical linkage, shedding light on the potential ramifications of GMOs on reproductive health.

As we continue to delve into the labyrinth of intertwined variables, it is clear that our study has sown the seeds for future research in this fertile field of inquiry. The bounty of research opportunities that sprouts from this correlation is as abundant as an endless field of cornstalks, enticing us to nurture this burgeoning field of study.

In conclusion, our research offers an illuminating insight into the potential impact of GMO-infused corn on fertility rates, encouraging further exploration and discourse in this captivating area of research. It has not only enriched the existing body of knowledge but also serves as a testament to the fruitful marriage of statistical analysis and agricultural science.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Texas and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity

[[ABSTRACT]]
The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As we delve into the labyrinth of empirical inquiry, we embark on a quest to untangle the enigmatic web of connections between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn and the birth rates of triplets or more. The intersection of agriculture and fecundity may seem all ears and sprouted with perplexity, but our research aims to cultivate a deeper understanding of this unlikely correlation.
This study sprouted from a kernel of curiosity - the notion that the cornucopia of genetically modified corn in Texas may be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the United States. With the burgeoning debate around the safety and impact of GMOs, uncovering any potential links to reproductive outcomes could peel back the husk of a fascinating discovery.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we are reminded that correlation does not imply causation - but oh, how tempting it is to speculate about the potential mechanisms at play! Could it be that GMOs are triggering a fertility frenzy, or is this simply a kernel of statistical happenstance? Our findings promise to plant the seeds of thought-provoking discourse as we embark on this intellectual journey through the fields of agriculture and obstetrics.
It is our fervent hope that this research will not only cultivate a deeper understanding of the potential impact of GMOs on fertility but also provide an ear of corny puns and lighthearted statistics to nourish the minds of our esteemed colleagues. So, let us embark on this maize of intrigue with a curious spirit and a healthy dose of scientific humor, for in the world of statistics, sometimes the best discoveries are found amidst the stalks of unexpected correlations.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States from 2005 to 2021. This correlation, signifying a strong positive relationship, had an r-squared value of 0.8558396, further cementing the veracity and robustness of the association. The p-value less than 0.01 indicated a high level of statistical significance, suggesting that this correlation was not merely a statistical fluke but a bona fide revelation.
The results of our study are graphically depicted in Figure 1, a scatterplot that vividly captures the impressive correlation between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn in Texas and the occurrence of multiple births. While we can't help but marvel at the statistical beauty of the correlation, the implications of these findings also warrant earnest consideration and further investigation – a kernel of truth ready to sprout into a field of scientific inquiry.
It may appear corny at first to entertain the notion of genetically modified corn impacting fertility rates, but as we peel back the layers of this unexpected relationship, we uncover a bounty of future research opportunities. The fertile ground of GMO-infused corn in Texas may indeed be sowing more than just grains – it might be sowing the seeds of multiple births across the nation. Our findings invite further discourse on the potential effects of GMOs on reproductive outcomes and offer a compelling entry point for the exploration of this captivating correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the evidence presented in this study overwhelmingly supports a robust correlation between the widespread use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. While some may dismiss this as merely a corny coincidence, our findings suggest that there may be a kernel of truth to this unexpected relationship. The statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 serves as a compelling testament to the potential influence of GMO-infused corn on fertility trends. As we digest the implications of these results, it's hard not to make a few "ear"-resistible puns about the stalk market and the ear-resistible allure of statistical surprises.

While it's tempting to let our pun-making skills "sprout" at this stage, it's important to remember that correlation does not imply causation – although in this case, it might be tempting to say, "A-ha, GMOs are the seeds of fertility grandeur!" However, it's crucial to exercise caution and avoid "cornfusing" speculation with solid scientific inference. Nevertheless, the “ears” of future research opportunities in this domain are ripe for the picking. The implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes are too vast to be swept under the rug. We must continue to plow ahead with further research without “corn-promise”.

In light of these findings, we assert that no further "stalks" of research are needed in this area... Just kidding! Let the research 'kernel' rolling!


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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agronomical Advancements


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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Consortium for Agricultural Advancements and Genomic Innovation (CAAGI)


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 Corn in Texas: Gearing Galore of Growing Great Grains and Grandiose Gravidity with an abstract of The study explores the possible link between the extensive use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in Texas and the birth rates of triplets or more in the United States. Utilizing data from the USDA and CDC, our research team conducted a rigorous analysis to uncover the hidden connections between these seemingly disparate variables. The results revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9251160 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 2005 to 2021, indicating a compelling statistical significance. Our findings suggest a potential association between the proliferation of GMO-infused corn and the occurrence of multiple births. While this correlation may seem corny at first, the implications for both agricultural practices and reproductive outcomes could be quite groundbreaking. This research sheds light on the cornucopia of factors influencing fertility trends, inviting further investigation into the kernel of truth behind this intriguing relationship.

ChatGPT:

Genetically modified corn, GMOs in Texas, corn cultivation, birth rates, triplets, multiple births, USDA data, CDC data, correlation coefficient, statistical significance, agricultural practices, reproductive outcomes, fertility trends

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

US birth rates of triplets or more
Source: CDC
See what else correlates with US birth rates of triplets or more

Correlation r = 0.9251160 (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 = 0.8558396 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 85.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., US birth rates of triplets or more) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in corn grown in Texas) over the 17 years from 2005 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.07E-7. 0.0000001065606591048129100000
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 0.93 in 1.07E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 9,384,326 random variables You don't actually need 9 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 16 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 16 because we have two variables measured over a period of 17 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.8, 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.
20052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
GMO use in corn grown in Texas (GMO corn %)2127222021182220161210856683
US birth rates of triplets or more (Birth rate per 100,000)170156151148152138137124.4119.5113.5103.6101.4101.69387.779.680




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([21,27,22,20,21,18,22,20,16,12,10,8,5,6,6,8,3,])
array_2 = np.array([170,156,151,148,152,138,137,124.4,119.5,113.5,103.6,101.4,101.6,93,87.7,79.6,80,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in corn grown in Texas"
array_2_name = "US birth rates of triplets or more"

# 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 dedication to rating warms my heart!


Correlation ID: 1834 · Black Variable ID: 721 · Red Variable ID: 55
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0