about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,026 · 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 South Dakota and the second variable is Wind power generated in Puerto Rico.  The chart goes from 2010 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the GMO corn in South Dakota grew taller and stronger, it began to sway more vigorously in the wind. This inadvertently triggered a chain reaction, creating a microclimate of increased air currents. Unbeknownst to all, the corn fields had essentially become giant, unintentional wind farms, providing an unexpected and renewable energy source for Puerto Rico.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image inspired by data cyber art depicting a futuristic scene featuring a South Dakota field. Show a farmer tending to rows of tall, healthy corn plants, some of which bear the label "GMO" on their husks. In the background, showcase graceful wind turbines spinning against the clear blue sky of Puerto Rico, generating clean and sustainable energy. Emphasize the contrast between traditional farming and sustainable energy generation in a visually captivating way. 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 South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. 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: Charcoal Charcoal Minimalism Data cyber art Magic realism
ChatGPT: Data cyber art

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 South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a field in South Dakota, a farmer tends to rows of tall, healthy corn plants, some bearing the label "GMO" on their husks. In the background, wind turbines spin gracefully against the clear blue sky of Puerto Rico, generating clean and sustainable energy.

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: [ Data cyber art ] and depicting this scene: In a field in South Dakota, a farmer tends to rows of tall, healthy corn plants, some bearing the label "GMO" on their husks. In the background, wind turbines spin gracefully against the clear blue sky of Puerto Rico, generating clean and sustainable energy. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image inspired by data cyber art depicting a futuristic scene featuring a South Dakota field. Show a farmer tending to rows of tall, healthy corn plants, some of which bear the label "GMO" on their husks. In the background, showcase graceful wind turbines spinning against the clear blue sky of Puerto Rico, generating clean and sustainable energy. Emphasize the contrast between traditional farming and sustainable energy generation in a visually captivating way.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota caused Wind power generated in Puerto Rico to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

The Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Renewable Energy

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from USDA and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9197522 and p < 0.01 for 2010 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]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Prepare to be corn-fused as we delve into the ear-ily unexpected connection between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico. At first glance, these two seemingly unrelated factors may leave you scratching your head like a farmer tending to rows of genetically modified crops. But fear not, as we embark on this maize-ing journey of scientific inquiry, we aim to illuminate the curious correlation that has sprouted between these agricultural and energy phenomena.

As the debate over GMOs continues to stalk the fields of agriculture, it's no surprise that researchers have been keen to cultivate a deeper understanding of their impact. Similarly, the quest for clean and sustainable energy sources has been blowing through the energy sector like a brisk wind through a wind farm. Both fields have garnered plenty of attention, but little did we expect that their paths would entwine in such an unexpected manner.

By harnessing the power of data analysis, we have ploughed through datasets from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration to harvest insights that may leave you feeling a-maize-d. Our pursuit of statistical significance has unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value lower than a worm's belly in the soil (less than 0.01 to be exact) for the period spanning 2010 to 2021.

Join us as we peel back the husk of conventional thinking to reveal the kernel of truth residing in the sprawling fields of agricultural practice and renewable energy development. In doing so, we hope to sow the seeds of knowledge and reap a harvest of understanding about the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated sectors. So come along and prepare to be blown away as we explore the unexpected synergy between GMO corn cultivation and the generation of wind power, transforming a seemingly uncorrelated pair into a spectacle as awe-inspiring as a tornado swirling through a field of corn.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Prepare to be corn-fused as we delve into the ear-ily unexpected connection between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico. At first glance, these two seemingly unrelated factors may leave you scratching your head like a farmer tending to rows of genetically modified crops. But fear not, as we embark on this maize-ing journey of scientific inquiry, we aim to illuminate the curious correlation that has sprouted between these agricultural and energy phenomena.
As the debate over GMOs continues to stalk the fields of agriculture, it's no surprise that researchers have been keen to cultivate a deeper understanding of their impact. Similarly, the quest for clean and sustainable energy sources has been blowing through the energy sector like a brisk wind through a wind farm. Both fields have garnered plenty of attention, but little did we expect that their paths would entwine in such an unexpected manner.
By harnessing the power of data analysis, we have ploughed through datasets from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration to harvest insights that may leave you feeling a-maize-d. Our pursuit of statistical significance has unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value lower than a worm's belly in the soil (less than 0.01 to be exact) for the period spanning 2010 to 2021.
Join us as we peel back the husk of conventional thinking to reveal the kernel of truth residing in the sprawling fields of agricultural practice and renewable energy development. In doing so, we hope to sow the seeds of knowledge and reap a harvest of understanding about the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated sectors. So come along and prepare to be blown away as we explore the unexpected synergy between GMO corn cultivation and the generation of wind power, transforming a seemingly uncorrelated pair into a spectacle as awe-inspiring as a tornado swirling through a field of corn.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "The Impact of GMOs on Corn Cultivation" by Smith et al., the authors find a comprehensive analysis of the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn production, focusing on the agronomic, economic, and environmental implications. Their study offers in-depth insights into the adoption and impact of GMO varieties in major corn-growing regions, including South Dakota. Yet, as captivating as their work may be, it fails to foresee the gusty turns this research is about to take.

Moving on to the realm of renewable energy, Doe and Jones, in "The Wind beneath Our Turbines: Harnessing Renewable Energy," delve into the intricacies of wind power generation, exploring the technical, economic, and environmental aspects of harnessing wind as a sustainable energy source. Their examination leaves no stone unturned in elucidating the factors influencing wind power deployment and performance, but little did they realize that a whirlwind of unexpected connections was brewing beyond the pages of their research.

Beyond the scholarly domain, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan and "Eating Animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer offer thought-provoking insights into modern agricultural practices and the ethical considerations surrounding food production. While these works may not directly address the GMO correlation we seek to unravel, they remind us that our choices as consumers and cultivators have far-reaching consequences, much like an unexpected breeze that carries seeds to distant lands.

Delving further into the fiction realm, John Grisham's "The Rainmaker" and Nora Roberts' "Windfall" may not appear to hold relevance to our study at first glance. However, bear with us as we breeze through an unconventional literary landscape where fictional narratives occasionally intersect with the winds of reality, much like a gust of wind playfully rustling the leaves of our scientific inquiry.

In the animated world, "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" and "The Magic School Bus" serve as whimsical reminders of the interconnectedness of natural phenomena and human activities. Though they may seem light as air, these sources inspire us to approach our study with an open mind and a sense of playfulness as we chase the swirling winds of correlation between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico.

What follows is a whirlwind tour through scholarly, literary, and even lighthearted sources, each carrying a grain of relevance to our study, much like pollen carried by the wind.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 2010 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]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Prepare to be corn-fused as we delve into the ear-ily unexpected connection between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico. At first glance, these two seemingly unrelated factors may leave you scratching your head like a farmer tending to rows of genetically modified crops. But fear not, as we embark on this maize-ing journey of scientific inquiry, we aim to illuminate the curious correlation that has sprouted between these agricultural and energy phenomena.
As the debate over GMOs continues to stalk the fields of agriculture, it's no surprise that researchers have been keen to cultivate a deeper understanding of their impact. Similarly, the quest for clean and sustainable energy sources has been blowing through the energy sector like a brisk wind through a wind farm. Both fields have garnered plenty of attention, but little did we expect that their paths would entwine in such an unexpected manner.
By harnessing the power of data analysis, we have ploughed through datasets from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration to harvest insights that may leave you feeling a-maize-d. Our pursuit of statistical significance has unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value lower than a worm's belly in the soil (less than 0.01 to be exact) for the period spanning 2010 to 2021.
Join us as we peel back the husk of conventional thinking to reveal the kernel of truth residing in the sprawling fields of agricultural practice and renewable energy development. In doing so, we hope to sow the seeds of knowledge and reap a harvest of understanding about the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated sectors. So come along and prepare to be blown away as we explore the unexpected synergy between GMO corn cultivation and the generation of wind power, transforming a seemingly uncorrelated pair into a spectacle as awe-inspiring as a tornado swirling through a field of corn.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To get to the root of the GMO and wind power correlation, our research team adopted a multifaceted approach that combined the precision of a meticulous corn farmer with the flustered energy of a wind turbine in a storm.

Firstly, we gathered an extensive assortment of data from various sources, particularly sinking our teeth into datasets from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA). We embraced the data with open arms like a hybrid corn plant making the most of both conventional and genetically modified traits. Our data collection spanned from 2010 to 2021, allowing us to capture the ebb and flow of agricultural practices and wind power generation over a significant timeframe.

The next step involved a statistical dance as we juggled the variables of GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power generation in Puerto Rico. Employing both regression analysis and time series modelling, we sought to untangle the tangled vines of correlation and causation. While maneuvering through the maize of data, we employed sophisticated software that would have made any discerning statistician green with envy.

In addition to our quantitative endeavors, we also conducted qualitative interviews with agricultural experts and energy professionals. This approach allowed us to glean insights from those enmeshed in the cornfields and windswept landscapes, providing a more holistic perspective that merged the empirical data with the human experience.

Throughout our methodological harvest, we remained ever-vigilant for potential confounding variables that could have contaminated our findings like pesky corn earworms. We carefully controlled for factors such as weather patterns, market demands for corn-based products, and broader trends in renewable energy policy. By nurturing this methodological garden, we aimed to ensure that the blooms of correlation we discovered were not mere statistical weeds sprouting in a field of noise.

In this unconventional quest for insight, we embraced the unpredictability of scientific inquiry with the same gusto as a farmer preparing for a bountiful harvest. As our research sprouted forth from the patchwork of methodologies, we remained mindful of the need to till the soil of curiosity and cultivate a crop of scholarly rigor, all while infusing the process with a healthy dose of scientific whimsy.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 2010 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9197522, r-squared of 0.8459441, 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]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Prepare to be corn-fused as we delve into the ear-ily unexpected connection between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico. At first glance, these two seemingly unrelated factors may leave you scratching your head like a farmer tending to rows of genetically modified crops. But fear not, as we embark on this maize-ing journey of scientific inquiry, we aim to illuminate the curious correlation that has sprouted between these agricultural and energy phenomena.
As the debate over GMOs continues to stalk the fields of agriculture, it's no surprise that researchers have been keen to cultivate a deeper understanding of their impact. Similarly, the quest for clean and sustainable energy sources has been blowing through the energy sector like a brisk wind through a wind farm. Both fields have garnered plenty of attention, but little did we expect that their paths would entwine in such an unexpected manner.
By harnessing the power of data analysis, we have ploughed through datasets from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration to harvest insights that may leave you feeling a-maize-d. Our pursuit of statistical significance has unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value lower than a worm's belly in the soil (less than 0.01 to be exact) for the period spanning 2010 to 2021.
Join us as we peel back the husk of conventional thinking to reveal the kernel of truth residing in the sprawling fields of agricultural practice and renewable energy development. In doing so, we hope to sow the seeds of knowledge and reap a harvest of understanding about the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated sectors. So come along and prepare to be blown away as we explore the unexpected synergy between GMO corn cultivation and the generation of wind power, transforming a seemingly uncorrelated pair into a spectacle as awe-inspiring as a tornado swirling through a field of corn.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The quantitative analysis of the data collected revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9197522 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. The observed correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8459441, indicating that approximately 84.59% of the variance in wind power generation in Puerto Rico could be explained by the use of GMOs in corn cultivation in South Dakota during the period from 2010 to 2021.

The statistically significant findings, with a p-value of less than 0.01, suggest that the observed relationship is not merely a kernel of truth but a robust and ear-resistible association worthy of further investigation. It's as if these two variables were peas in a pod, showing a remarkable affinity for one another across geographical and sectoral boundaries.

Moreover, the correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which illustrates a scatterplot highlighting the strong positive relationship between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and the wind power generated in Puerto Rico. The scatterplot serves as a striking visual confirmation of the statistical analysis, showcasing the close connection akin to two peas in a pod amidst a sea of data points.

Overall, the results of this study not only provide empirical evidence of the unexpected correlation between agricultural practices and renewable energy generation but also cultivate an awareness of the intricate connections that fancy the fertility of revelation. As we delve deeper into this cornucopia of interconnectedness, it becomes increasingly clear that the intertwined nature of these variables is not just a mere stalk of coincidence but a harvest of unanticipated harmony.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Impact of GMOs on Corn Cultivation" by Smith et al., the authors find a comprehensive analysis of the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn production, focusing on the agronomic, economic, and environmental implications. Their study offers in-depth insights into the adoption and impact of GMO varieties in major corn-growing regions, including South Dakota. Yet, as captivating as their work may be, it fails to foresee the gusty turns this research is about to take.
Moving on to the realm of renewable energy, Doe and Jones, in "The Wind beneath Our Turbines: Harnessing Renewable Energy," delve into the intricacies of wind power generation, exploring the technical, economic, and environmental aspects of harnessing wind as a sustainable energy source. Their examination leaves no stone unturned in elucidating the factors influencing wind power deployment and performance, but little did they realize that a whirlwind of unexpected connections was brewing beyond the pages of their research.
Beyond the scholarly domain, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan and "Eating Animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer offer thought-provoking insights into modern agricultural practices and the ethical considerations surrounding food production. While these works may not directly address the GMO correlation we seek to unravel, they remind us that our choices as consumers and cultivators have far-reaching consequences, much like an unexpected breeze that carries seeds to distant lands.
Delving further into the fiction realm, John Grisham's "The Rainmaker" and Nora Roberts' "Windfall" may not appear to hold relevance to our study at first glance. However, bear with us as we breeze through an unconventional literary landscape where fictional narratives occasionally intersect with the winds of reality, much like a gust of wind playfully rustling the leaves of our scientific inquiry.
In the animated world, "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" and "The Magic School Bus" serve as whimsical reminders of the interconnectedness of natural phenomena and human activities. Though they may seem light as air, these sources inspire us to approach our study with an open mind and a sense of playfulness as we chase the swirling winds of correlation between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico.
What follows is a whirlwind tour through scholarly, literary, and even lighthearted sources, each carrying a grain of relevance to our study, much like pollen carried by the wind.

[[RESULTS]]
The quantitative analysis of the data collected revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9197522 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. The observed correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8459441, indicating that approximately 84.59% of the variance in wind power generation in Puerto Rico could be explained by the use of GMOs in corn cultivation in South Dakota during the period from 2010 to 2021.
The statistically significant findings, with a p-value of less than 0.01, suggest that the observed relationship is not merely a kernel of truth but a robust and ear-resistible association worthy of further investigation. It's as if these two variables were peas in a pod, showing a remarkable affinity for one another across geographical and sectoral boundaries.
Moreover, the correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which illustrates a scatterplot highlighting the strong positive relationship between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and the wind power generated in Puerto Rico. The scatterplot serves as a striking visual confirmation of the statistical analysis, showcasing the close connection akin to two peas in a pod amidst a sea of data points.
Overall, the results of this study not only provide empirical evidence of the unexpected correlation between agricultural practices and renewable energy generation but also cultivate an awareness of the intricate connections that fancy the fertility of revelation. As we delve deeper into this cornucopia of interconnectedness, it becomes increasingly clear that the intertwined nature of these variables is not just a mere stalk of coincidence but a harvest of unanticipated harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The winds of correlation have blown us into the heart of a truly corny but ear-resistibly fascinating study. Our findings have sprouted a compelling case for the interconnectedness of corn cultivation in the Midwest and the generation of wind power in the tropics, uncovering an unexpected union between seemingly unrelated domains. Just like the plot thickens in a suspense novel, our research has captivated us with a twist in the tale of agricultural and energy sectors.

Drawing upon the literature review, we were reminded of the gusty turns this journey has taken. Smith et al.'s exploration of the impact of GMOs failed to foresee the whirlwind of interconnectedness we uncovered, akin to discovering a secret ingredient in a culinary masterpiece. Similarly, Doe and Jones' investigation into wind power generation unwittingly laid the groundwork for our own unexpected discovery, much like a playful undertone in a symphony of scientific inquiry.

The statistical results have lent strong support to prior research, indicating that our findings are not just a kernel of truth but a robust and ear-resistible association worthy of further examination. The high correlation coefficient and r-squared value suggest an affinity between GMO use in corn cultivated in South Dakota and wind power generated in Puerto Rico, akin to two peas in a pod displaying a remarkable affinity for each other.

The visual representation of the correlation in Figure 1 serves as a whimsical testimony to the synergy between these variables, akin to a captivating piece of art amidst a sea of data points. Our results not only confirm the unexpected relationship between agricultural practices and renewable energy generation but also cultivate an awareness of the intricate connections that fancy the fertility of revelation. It's as if we've stumbled upon a scientific serendipity, unveiling an unexpected harmony in the dance of correlation.

As we prepare to harvest the fruits of this interconnectedness, our study encourages us all to approach science with a sense of playfulness and open-mindedness, much like active participants in a whimsical scientific expedition. After all, in the world of research, the unexpected can often be the most delightful discovery.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and Wind power generated in Puerto Rico. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Prepare to be corn-fused as we delve into the ear-ily unexpected connection between GMO corn in South Dakota and wind power in Puerto Rico. At first glance, these two seemingly unrelated factors may leave you scratching your head like a farmer tending to rows of genetically modified crops. But fear not, as we embark on this maize-ing journey of scientific inquiry, we aim to illuminate the curious correlation that has sprouted between these agricultural and energy phenomena.
As the debate over GMOs continues to stalk the fields of agriculture, it's no surprise that researchers have been keen to cultivate a deeper understanding of their impact. Similarly, the quest for clean and sustainable energy sources has been blowing through the energy sector like a brisk wind through a wind farm. Both fields have garnered plenty of attention, but little did we expect that their paths would entwine in such an unexpected manner.
By harnessing the power of data analysis, we have ploughed through datasets from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration to harvest insights that may leave you feeling a-maize-d. Our pursuit of statistical significance has unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value lower than a worm's belly in the soil (less than 0.01 to be exact) for the period spanning 2010 to 2021.
Join us as we peel back the husk of conventional thinking to reveal the kernel of truth residing in the sprawling fields of agricultural practice and renewable energy development. In doing so, we hope to sow the seeds of knowledge and reap a harvest of understanding about the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated sectors. So come along and prepare to be blown away as we explore the unexpected synergy between GMO corn cultivation and the generation of wind power, transforming a seemingly uncorrelated pair into a spectacle as awe-inspiring as a tornado swirling through a field of corn.

[[RESULTS]]
The quantitative analysis of the data collected revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9197522 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. The observed correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8459441, indicating that approximately 84.59% of the variance in wind power generation in Puerto Rico could be explained by the use of GMOs in corn cultivation in South Dakota during the period from 2010 to 2021.
The statistically significant findings, with a p-value of less than 0.01, suggest that the observed relationship is not merely a kernel of truth but a robust and ear-resistible association worthy of further investigation. It's as if these two variables were peas in a pod, showing a remarkable affinity for one another across geographical and sectoral boundaries.
Moreover, the correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which illustrates a scatterplot highlighting the strong positive relationship between GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota and the wind power generated in Puerto Rico. The scatterplot serves as a striking visual confirmation of the statistical analysis, showcasing the close connection akin to two peas in a pod amidst a sea of data points.
Overall, the results of this study not only provide empirical evidence of the unexpected correlation between agricultural practices and renewable energy generation but also cultivate an awareness of the intricate connections that fancy the fertility of revelation. As we delve deeper into this cornucopia of interconnectedness, it becomes increasingly clear that the intertwined nature of these variables is not just a mere stalk of coincidence but a harvest of unanticipated harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

As we harvest the fruits of our labor in uncovering the surprisingly strong correlation between GMO use in corn cultivated in South Dakota and wind power generation in Puerto Rico, we are reminded of the ear-resistible nature of scientific inquiry. This research not only sheds light on the interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated industries but also serves as a corny reminder that the winds of correlation can blow through unexpected fields.

The statistical findings, with a p-value lower than a mole's burrow (less than 0.01), leave little room for kernel of doubt regarding the robust relationship between these variables. It appears that GMOs and wind power have sown the seeds of a harmonious connection, akin to two peas in a pod amidst a sea of data points.

In culmination, we must acknowledge that no more research is needed in this area. The final results rice to the occasion and show that this correlation is not just a stalk of mere coincidence but a harvest of unanticipated harmony, and any further research would just be adding more corn-fusion to the mix.


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 Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Renewable Energy


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 Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agricultural Innovation and Caribbean Renewable Energy (SAICRE)


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 Corn’s GMO Connection: Correlating Crop Cultivation in the Midwest to Caribbean Wind Power with an abstract of In this study, we set out to sprout some surprising connections in the agricultural and energy sectors by examining the potential link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn cultivation in South Dakota and the generation of wind power in Puerto Rico. By harnessing data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we unearthed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9197522, with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2010 to 2021. Our findings not only shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate industries, but also reveal an ear-resistible relationship between the cultivation of GMO corn and the generation of wind power. As we embark on this cornucopia of discovery, we invite readers to join us in harvesting the unexpected synergies between agricultural practices in the heartland and renewable energy development in the tropics.

ChatGPT:

GMO corn cultivation, Midwest agriculture, wind power generation, correlation coefficient, USDA data, Energy Information Administration, South Dakota farming, Puerto Rico renewable energy, agricultural practices, renewable energy development, genetically modified organisms, corn cultivation, wind power, synergy, interconnected industries, surprising connections

*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 South Dakota
Detailed data title: Percent of all corn planted in South Dakota genetically modified with both Bt and HT
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota

Wind power generated in Puerto Rico
Detailed data title: Total wind power generated in Puerto Rico in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Wind power generated in Puerto Rico

Correlation r = 0.9197522 (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 = 0.8459441 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 84.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Wind power generated in Puerto Rico) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota) over the 12 years from 2010 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.3E-5. 0.0000228784533241167570000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.92 in 0.0023% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 43,709 random variables You don't actually need 43 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. 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.

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 11 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 11 because we have two variables measured over a period of 12 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.

[ 0.73, 0.98 ] 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.
201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota (GMO corn %)606462828083787779798083
Wind power generated in Puerto Rico (Billion kWh)0.0010.0010.0150.1730.2180.2390.1930.1490.1080.1590.1430.162554




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([60,64,62,82,80,83,78,77,79,79,80,83,])
array_2 = np.array([0.001,0.001,0.015,0.173,0.218,0.239,0.193,0.149,0.108,0.159,0.143,0.162554,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in corn grown in South Dakota"
array_2_name = "Wind power generated in Puerto Rico"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is stellar!


Correlation ID: 2026 · Black Variable ID: 749 · Red Variable ID: 23910
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0