about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,039 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton in Missouri and the second variable is Robberies in the US.  The chart goes from 2005 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

It turns out that as GMO use in cotton decreased, the size of the cotton bolls also decreased. This led to a nationwide shortage of cotton balls for cosmetic and first aid use. With fewer cotton balls available, would-be robbers found it increasingly difficult to carry out their crimes while maintaining proper personal hygiene and tending to any unexpected boo-boos. This unforeseen consequence serves as a stark reminder that even the smallest decisions can have a big impact on the cleanliness and well-being of our communities. Remember, cleanliness may not be next to godliness, but it could be the key to reducing crime!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [Whimsical illustration] Create an image of a Missouri cotton field with a whimsical touch. A farmer in overalls and a straw hat inspects rows of brightly colored, oversized cotton plants bearing quirky patterns, while in the distance, a comically exaggerated group of robbers, each with a different whimsical mask and cartoonish bags of stolen goods, make their escape. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. 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: Low poly Cybernetic art Whimsical illustration Whimsical illustration Cybernetic art
ChatGPT: Whimsical illustration

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a Missouri cotton field, a farmer inspects rows of genetically modified cotton plants, while in the distance, a group of robbers wearing masks and carrying bags of stolen goods flee the scene.

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: [ Whimsical illustration ] and depicting this scene: In a Missouri cotton field, a farmer inspects rows of genetically modified cotton plants, while in the distance, a group of robbers wearing masks and carrying bags of stolen goods flee the scene. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [Whimsical illustration] Create an image of a Missouri cotton field with a whimsical touch. A farmer in overalls and a straw hat inspects rows of brightly colored, oversized cotton plants bearing quirky patterns, while in the distance, a comically exaggerated group of robbers, each with a different whimsical mask and cartoonish bags of stolen goods, make their escape.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

The Journal of Ecological Economics and Entomological Ethics

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01 for 2005 to 2022.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The relationship between agricultural practices and societal behavior is a topic that has long been cultivated in the fields of research. While most studies focus on the impact of GMOs on crop yields or environmental sustainability, this study takes a more "seeductive" approach by exploring the unexpected association between genetically modified cotton and crime rates in Missouri. Yes, you read that right - we're delving into the world of crop-related crime, where the boll weevil effect meets the lawbreaker's dilemma.

It's no secret that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been the subject of much debate and scrutiny, with some hailing them as saviors of agriculture and others painting them as the villains of the natural world. In the case of cotton cultivation in Missouri, the proliferation of GMO varieties has increased over the past two decades, coinciding with advancements in agricultural technology and a surge in boll weevil resistance. But could these seemingly innocuous cotton fields be unwittingly sowing the seeds of criminal behavior?

Our study aims to peel back the layers of this peculiar onion and examine the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the occurrence of robberies in the Show-Me State. We'll be digging deep into the data, crunching numbers, and carefully weaving the strands of statistical analysis to unravel this unexpected connection. So buckle up and prepare for a journey through the cotton fields and crime stats of Missouri, where the only thing genetically modified is your perception of agricultural impact.

Stay tuned for the unexpected twists and turns as we dig into the dirt of this unconventional association, where the only thing more mixed than the GMO cotton strains is the surprising correlation with criminal activity. Let's plow ahead and unearth the insights lurking beneath the surface of the genetically modified cotton fields!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. 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 name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between agricultural practices and societal behavior is a topic that has long been cultivated in the fields of research. While most studies focus on the impact of GMOs on crop yields or environmental sustainability, this study takes a more "seeductive" approach by exploring the unexpected association between genetically modified cotton and crime rates in Missouri. Yes, you read that right - we're delving into the world of crop-related crime, where the boll weevil effect meets the lawbreaker's dilemma.
It's no secret that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been the subject of much debate and scrutiny, with some hailing them as saviors of agriculture and others painting them as the villains of the natural world. In the case of cotton cultivation in Missouri, the proliferation of GMO varieties has increased over the past two decades, coinciding with advancements in agricultural technology and a surge in boll weevil resistance. But could these seemingly innocuous cotton fields be unwittingly sowing the seeds of criminal behavior?
Our study aims to peel back the layers of this peculiar onion and examine the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the occurrence of robberies in the Show-Me State. We'll be digging deep into the data, crunching numbers, and carefully weaving the strands of statistical analysis to unravel this unexpected connection. So buckle up and prepare for a journey through the cotton fields and crime stats of Missouri, where the only thing genetically modified is your perception of agricultural impact.
Stay tuned for the unexpected twists and turns as we dig into the dirt of this unconventional association, where the only thing more mixed than the GMO cotton strains is the surprising correlation with criminal activity. Let's plow ahead and unearth the insights lurking beneath the surface of the genetically modified cotton fields!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.," a comprehensive study of genetically modified cotton cultivation in Missouri is conducted, focusing on its impact on crop yields and resistance to pests. The authors find substantial evidence supporting the benefits of GMO cotton, such as increased productivity and reduced pesticide usage. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" delve into the economic implications of GMO adoption in cotton, highlighting the potential cost savings and environmental advantages associated with genetically modified varieties. These seminal works lay the groundwork for understanding the widespread use of GMO cotton in modern agricultural practices.

In "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, the author investigates the complex web of food production and consumption in the 21st century, addressing the influence of genetically modified crops on the agricultural landscape. Furthermore, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner provides an unconventional perspective on societal phenomena, prompting readers to consider unorthodox connections between seemingly unrelated variables. Although not directly related to cotton cultivation, these works offer valuable insights into the broader implications of agricultural innovation on human behavior and decision-making.

Venturing into the realm of fiction, "The Cotton Queen" by Pamela Morsi and "Field of Dreams" by W.P. Kinsella explore the transformative power of agricultural pursuits, albeit in a more romanticized and imaginative context. Additionally, the classic novel "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee presents themes of justice, societal inequality, and compassion within the Southern backdrop, offering a poignant reflection on the complexities of human nature.

As for cinematic portrayals, "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" and "Gone in 60 Seconds" evoke the spirit of rural America and criminal intrigue, providing anecdotal glimpses into the potential intersection of agricultural landscapes and illicit activities. While these movies may seem distantly related to the scholarly investigation at hand, their portrayal of rural settings and criminal subplots offers a whimsical parallel to the purported link between GMO cotton and robbery rates in Missouri.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services . You used data from 2005 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between agricultural practices and societal behavior is a topic that has long been cultivated in the fields of research. While most studies focus on the impact of GMOs on crop yields or environmental sustainability, this study takes a more "seeductive" approach by exploring the unexpected association between genetically modified cotton and crime rates in Missouri. Yes, you read that right - we're delving into the world of crop-related crime, where the boll weevil effect meets the lawbreaker's dilemma.
It's no secret that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been the subject of much debate and scrutiny, with some hailing them as saviors of agriculture and others painting them as the villains of the natural world. In the case of cotton cultivation in Missouri, the proliferation of GMO varieties has increased over the past two decades, coinciding with advancements in agricultural technology and a surge in boll weevil resistance. But could these seemingly innocuous cotton fields be unwittingly sowing the seeds of criminal behavior?
Our study aims to peel back the layers of this peculiar onion and examine the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the occurrence of robberies in the Show-Me State. We'll be digging deep into the data, crunching numbers, and carefully weaving the strands of statistical analysis to unravel this unexpected connection. So buckle up and prepare for a journey through the cotton fields and crime stats of Missouri, where the only thing genetically modified is your perception of agricultural impact.
Stay tuned for the unexpected twists and turns as we dig into the dirt of this unconventional association, where the only thing more mixed than the GMO cotton strains is the surprising correlation with criminal activity. Let's plow ahead and unearth the insights lurking beneath the surface of the genetically modified cotton fields!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To till the soil of inquiry in our study, we employed a robust data collection and analysis approach to unearth the potential link between the use of genetically modified cotton in Missouri and the prevalence of robberies. Our research team conducted an extensive exploration across the internet, akin to skilled truffle hunters seeking out elusive data sources. The primary repositories of information were the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, where a wealth of data spanning from 2005 to 2022 was gleaned like ripe cotton ready for harvest.

In our quest for understanding, we utilized a correlational analysis, akin to matchmaking statisticians seeking to pair unexpected companions. This involved wrangling the data into submission, coaxing it to reveal its innermost secrets through the application of complex statistical techniques. Our approach was akin to a well-choreographed dance, where the tango of the genetic cotton and the foxtrot of felony rates twirled together in a statistical pas de deux.

The statistical analysis involved calculating the correlation coefficient, a measure of the strength and direction of the relationship between GMO cotton adoption and robbery rates. Additionally, we employed significance testing to determine the probability of our findings occurring by chance alone. This allowed us to ascertain the level of confidence in the observed association, akin to discerning a genuine diamond from a mere zirconium in the world of statistical gemology.

Furthermore, to ensure the robustness and reliability of our findings, we also incorporated sensitivity analyses to test the stability of the observed relationship under varying conditions, much like stress-testing the sturdiness of genetic cotton strains in different environmental contexts.

Our methodology sought to untangle the intertwined roots of GMO cotton cultivation and criminal activity, shedding light on a linkage that had thus far escaped detection. It's safe to say that the journey from raw data to revelatory findings was a bumpy ride through the unpredictable terrains of statistical analysis, but the yield of insights has proven to be as bountiful as a well-tended cotton field.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services .

For the time period 2005 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8207374, r-squared of 0.6736098, 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]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The relationship between agricultural practices and societal behavior is a topic that has long been cultivated in the fields of research. While most studies focus on the impact of GMOs on crop yields or environmental sustainability, this study takes a more "seeductive" approach by exploring the unexpected association between genetically modified cotton and crime rates in Missouri. Yes, you read that right - we're delving into the world of crop-related crime, where the boll weevil effect meets the lawbreaker's dilemma.
It's no secret that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been the subject of much debate and scrutiny, with some hailing them as saviors of agriculture and others painting them as the villains of the natural world. In the case of cotton cultivation in Missouri, the proliferation of GMO varieties has increased over the past two decades, coinciding with advancements in agricultural technology and a surge in boll weevil resistance. But could these seemingly innocuous cotton fields be unwittingly sowing the seeds of criminal behavior?
Our study aims to peel back the layers of this peculiar onion and examine the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the occurrence of robberies in the Show-Me State. We'll be digging deep into the data, crunching numbers, and carefully weaving the strands of statistical analysis to unravel this unexpected connection. So buckle up and prepare for a journey through the cotton fields and crime stats of Missouri, where the only thing genetically modified is your perception of agricultural impact.
Stay tuned for the unexpected twists and turns as we dig into the dirt of this unconventional association, where the only thing more mixed than the GMO cotton strains is the surprising correlation with criminal activity. Let's plow ahead and unearth the insights lurking beneath the surface of the genetically modified cotton fields!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The data analysis revealed a surprising correlation between the adoption of genetically modified cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. From 2005 to 2022, a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and an r-squared of 0.6736098 were found, with a p-value less than 0.01. These results indicate a strong positive association between the use of GMO cotton and the prevalence of robberies in the state.

Fig. 1 depicts the scatterplot, showcasing the unmistakable connection between GMO cotton adoption and robbery rates. The points on the graph resemble little boll weevils scurrying around, leaving behind a trail of statistical mischief. It is as if the cotton fields have become a "pickpocket" for criminal activity, luring in unsuspecting individuals with promises of biotechnological wonders, only to witness a surge in theft.

The strength of the correlation is akin to the tight embrace of a cotton boll, unraveling the intertwined relationship between agricultural practices and criminal behavior. It seems that the GMO cotton fields may have unwittingly become the new “hideout” for criminal activities, with robberies sprouting up like, well, cotton.

These results challenge conventional thinking and underscore the need for further investigation into the unexpected impact of agricultural practices on societal dynamics. While causation cannot be definitively established from this study, the robust correlation begs the question: are the boll weevils the real bandits, or are there deeper socio-economic forces at play? This unexpected discovery puts a fresh spin on the age-old debate surrounding GMOs, planting the seeds for a new era of interdisciplinary inquiry into the intersection of agriculture and crime.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," a comprehensive study of genetically modified cotton cultivation in Missouri is conducted, focusing on its impact on crop yields and resistance to pests. The authors find substantial evidence supporting the benefits of GMO cotton, such as increased productivity and reduced pesticide usage. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" delve into the economic implications of GMO adoption in cotton, highlighting the potential cost savings and environmental advantages associated with genetically modified varieties. These seminal works lay the groundwork for understanding the widespread use of GMO cotton in modern agricultural practices.
In "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, the author investigates the complex web of food production and consumption in the 21st century, addressing the influence of genetically modified crops on the agricultural landscape. Furthermore, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner provides an unconventional perspective on societal phenomena, prompting readers to consider unorthodox connections between seemingly unrelated variables. Although not directly related to cotton cultivation, these works offer valuable insights into the broader implications of agricultural innovation on human behavior and decision-making.
Venturing into the realm of fiction, "The Cotton Queen" by Pamela Morsi and "Field of Dreams" by W.P. Kinsella explore the transformative power of agricultural pursuits, albeit in a more romanticized and imaginative context. Additionally, the classic novel "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee presents themes of justice, societal inequality, and compassion within the Southern backdrop, offering a poignant reflection on the complexities of human nature.
As for cinematic portrayals, "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" and "Gone in 60 Seconds" evoke the spirit of rural America and criminal intrigue, providing anecdotal glimpses into the potential intersection of agricultural landscapes and illicit activities. While these movies may seem distantly related to the scholarly investigation at hand, their portrayal of rural settings and criminal subplots offers a whimsical parallel to the purported link between GMO cotton and robbery rates in Missouri.

[[RESULTS]]
The data analysis revealed a surprising correlation between the adoption of genetically modified cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. From 2005 to 2022, a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and an r-squared of 0.6736098 were found, with a p-value less than 0.01. These results indicate a strong positive association between the use of GMO cotton and the prevalence of robberies in the state.
Fig. 1 depicts the scatterplot, showcasing the unmistakable connection between GMO cotton adoption and robbery rates. The points on the graph resemble little boll weevils scurrying around, leaving behind a trail of statistical mischief. It is as if the cotton fields have become a "pickpocket" for criminal activity, luring in unsuspecting individuals with promises of biotechnological wonders, only to witness a surge in theft.
The strength of the correlation is akin to the tight embrace of a cotton boll, unraveling the intertwined relationship between agricultural practices and criminal behavior. It seems that the GMO cotton fields may have unwittingly become the new “hideout” for criminal activities, with robberies sprouting up like, well, cotton.
These results challenge conventional thinking and underscore the need for further investigation into the unexpected impact of agricultural practices on societal dynamics. While causation cannot be definitively established from this study, the robust correlation begs the question: are the boll weevils the real bandits, or are there deeper socio-economic forces at play? This unexpected discovery puts a fresh spin on the age-old debate surrounding GMOs, planting the seeds for a new era of interdisciplinary inquiry into the intersection of agriculture and crime.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The unexpected correlation uncovered in our research between the adoption of genetically modified cotton and the prevalence of robberies in Missouri raises some intriguing questions and challenges conventional wisdom. The results of our study are consistent with prior research that has explored the influence of agricultural practices on societal dynamics. Starting with the agricultural literature, prior studies by "Smith et al." and "Doe and Jones" have emphasized the advantages of GMO cotton, citing increased productivity and reduced pesticide usage. Our findings provide an unanticipated twist to this narrative, showcasing how the agricultural revolution may have inadvertently sown the seeds for a surge in criminal activity.

Building upon the unconventional parallels drawn in the literature review, the resounding positive correlation between GMO cotton adoption and robbery rates lends support to the notion that seemingly unrelated variables can have unexpected connections. The presence of boll weevils on our statistical scatterplot serves as a whimsical reminder of the intricate web of interactions at play. It is as if these little statistical critters are gleefully scurrying around, leaving behind a trail of mischief that hints at a newfound synergy between biotechnological advancements and criminal behavior.

Our findings align with the broader themes of the human-nature relationship portrayed in "The Cotton Queen," "Field of Dreams," and "To Kill a Mockingbird," where agricultural landscapes serve as potent backdrops for exploring societal dynamics and human behavior. The unexpected link between GMO cotton and robberies challenges us to reconsider the far-reaching implications of agricultural innovation, echoing the sentiment espoused in "Freakonomics" that conventional wisdom may not always hold true.

By revisiting these unconventional connections and constructing a coherent narrative, our study reinforces the value of interdisciplinary inquiry and prompts a reevaluation of established paradigms. As "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" and "Gone in 60 Seconds" remind us of the tangential intersections between rural imagery and criminal undertakings, our research infuses a touch of whimsy into the scholarly investigation, hinting at the potential for unexpected relationships in ostensibly unrelated domains.

Our results may have planted the seeds for a new era of attention to the complex relationship between agricultural practices and societal dynamics. In light of the unexpected influence of GMO cotton on robbery rates, it may be time to rethink the metaphorical "roots" of criminal behavior and embed a deeper understanding of agricultural practices into the fabric of criminological inquiry.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Missouri and Robberies. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The relationship between agricultural practices and societal behavior is a topic that has long been cultivated in the fields of research. While most studies focus on the impact of GMOs on crop yields or environmental sustainability, this study takes a more "seeductive" approach by exploring the unexpected association between genetically modified cotton and crime rates in Missouri. Yes, you read that right - we're delving into the world of crop-related crime, where the boll weevil effect meets the lawbreaker's dilemma.
It's no secret that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been the subject of much debate and scrutiny, with some hailing them as saviors of agriculture and others painting them as the villains of the natural world. In the case of cotton cultivation in Missouri, the proliferation of GMO varieties has increased over the past two decades, coinciding with advancements in agricultural technology and a surge in boll weevil resistance. But could these seemingly innocuous cotton fields be unwittingly sowing the seeds of criminal behavior?
Our study aims to peel back the layers of this peculiar onion and examine the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and the occurrence of robberies in the Show-Me State. We'll be digging deep into the data, crunching numbers, and carefully weaving the strands of statistical analysis to unravel this unexpected connection. So buckle up and prepare for a journey through the cotton fields and crime stats of Missouri, where the only thing genetically modified is your perception of agricultural impact.
Stay tuned for the unexpected twists and turns as we dig into the dirt of this unconventional association, where the only thing more mixed than the GMO cotton strains is the surprising correlation with criminal activity. Let's plow ahead and unearth the insights lurking beneath the surface of the genetically modified cotton fields!

[[RESULTS]]
The data analysis revealed a surprising correlation between the adoption of genetically modified cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. From 2005 to 2022, a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and an r-squared of 0.6736098 were found, with a p-value less than 0.01. These results indicate a strong positive association between the use of GMO cotton and the prevalence of robberies in the state.
Fig. 1 depicts the scatterplot, showcasing the unmistakable connection between GMO cotton adoption and robbery rates. The points on the graph resemble little boll weevils scurrying around, leaving behind a trail of statistical mischief. It is as if the cotton fields have become a "pickpocket" for criminal activity, luring in unsuspecting individuals with promises of biotechnological wonders, only to witness a surge in theft.
The strength of the correlation is akin to the tight embrace of a cotton boll, unraveling the intertwined relationship between agricultural practices and criminal behavior. It seems that the GMO cotton fields may have unwittingly become the new “hideout” for criminal activities, with robberies sprouting up like, well, cotton.
These results challenge conventional thinking and underscore the need for further investigation into the unexpected impact of agricultural practices on societal dynamics. While causation cannot be definitively established from this study, the robust correlation begs the question: are the boll weevils the real bandits, or are there deeper socio-economic forces at play? This unexpected discovery puts a fresh spin on the age-old debate surrounding GMOs, planting the seeds for a new era of interdisciplinary inquiry into the intersection of agriculture and crime.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a robust correlation between the adoption of genetically modified cotton and the incidence of robberies in Missouri. The statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated phenomena is as surprising as finding a needle in a genetically modified haystack. The data speaks for itself, painting a picture of cotton fields that not only yield bolls but also seem to attract some rather unsavory characters.

The findings of this study open up a whole new field of inquiry into the unintended consequences of agricultural practices. Who would have thought that tinkering with cotton genes could lead to an uptick in criminal activity? It's a real "cottonundrum," if you will.

It seems that the boll weevils might not be the only pests causing a stir in these fields. Could it be that the allure of GMO cotton has unsuspectingly drawn in a different kind of "cotton-picking" crowd? The implications of this unexpected connection are as vast as the cotton fields themselves.

However, it is imperative to note that while this correlation is compelling, we must resist the temptation to jump to conclusions faster than a jackrabbit in a GMO field. Causation cannot be definitively established from our findings, and further research is needed to dig deeper into the root causes of this unexpected association.

In closing, our study highlights the need for interdisciplinary collaboration between the fields of agriculture and criminology. It's time to bring together the "boll weevil whisperers" and the "crime scene cotton-pickers" to unravel this enigmatic relationship. As for now, it appears that the age-old adage "money doesn't grow on trees" might need a modern twist – perhaps money doesn't grow on GMO cotton either.

It is our firm conclusion that no more research is needed in this area. It's time to "harvest" these findings and plant the seeds for further exploration in other fertile fields of inquiry.


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 Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Ecological Economics and Entomological Ethics


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 Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Institute for Agricultural Economics and Criminology Integration (IAECI)


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 Seeing Through the Genetic Cotton: The Boll Weevil Effect on Robbery Rate in Missouri with an abstract of This paper investigates the potential, albeit unconventional, link between the deployment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton crops and the prevalence of robberies in the state of Missouri. Utilizing data from the USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services spanning from 2005 to 2022, we conducted a correlational analysis with surprising results. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8207374 and p < 0.01, suggesting a strong positive association between the adoption of GMO cotton and the occurrence of robberies in Missouri. This unexpected connection prompts further inquiry into how crop modification may inadvertently influence societal behavior. While we cannot definitively assert causation, the implications of our findings raise pressing questions and provide an unanticipated perspective on the impact of agricultural practices on criminal activity.

ChatGPT:

"genetically modified organisms cotton crime correlation","GMO cotton robbery correlation","cotton crop modification societal behavior","GM cotton effect on crime rate","GMO cotton impact on robbery","genetically modified cotton and criminal activity","biotechnology cotton crime statistics"

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Robberies in the US
Detailed data title: The robbery rate per 100,000 residents in United States
Source: FBI Criminal Justice Information Services
See what else correlates with Robberies in the US

Correlation r = 0.8207374 (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 = 0.6736098 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 67.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Robberies in the US) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Missouri) over the 18 years from 2005 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 3.004E-5. 0.0000300419627288550130000000
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 0.82 in 0.003004% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 33,287 random variables You don't actually need 33 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 17 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 17 because we have two variables measured over a period of 18 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.

[ 0.57, 0.93 ] 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.
200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
GMO use in cotton in Missouri (GMO cotton %)59406368294747325427363436201715724
Robberies in the US (Robbery rate)140.8150148.3145.9133.1119.3113.9113.1109101.3102.2102.998.686.181.873.965.566.1




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([59,40,63,68,29,47,47,32,54,27,36,34,36,20,17,15,7,24,])
array_2 = np.array([140.8,150,148.3,145.9,133.1,119.3,113.9,113.1,109,101.3,102.2,102.9,98.6,86.1,81.8,73.9,65.5,66.1,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in Missouri"
array_2_name = "Robberies in the US"

# 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 pure awesomeness!


Correlation ID: 2039 · Black Variable ID: 785 · Red Variable ID: 20182
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0