Spurious correlation #2,469 · 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 Mississippi and the second variable is Google searches for 'desktop background'. The chart goes from 2007 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

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 Mississippi and the second variable is Google searches for 'desktop background'. The chart goes from 2007 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

Farmers were no longer "cropping" up those genetically modified cotton plants, leading to a shortage of 1080p and 4K wallpapers. It seems the connection between organic cotton and organic screensavers is sewn into the fabric of technology. This correlation clearly shows that when it comes to sprouting new desktop backgrounds, Mississippi's non-GMO cotton fields were truly pixelating the market.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a vast cotton field in Mississippi under a clear blue sky, with farmers diligently planting non-GMO cotton seeds. The vibrant green leaves of the cotton plants sway in the wind. Show people in homes and offices across the state typing "desktop background" into their Google search bars, emphasizing the connection between the decrease in diverse fabric due to the decrease in GMO cotton and the hunt for unique desktop backgrounds. Keep the visual depiction simple and realistic. 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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: a Polaroid photo An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Magic realism Realistic Macabre
ChatGPT: Realistic

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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background', in the following situation: The decreased use of GMOs in cotton led to a shortage of "seedy" material, which meant less "fabric" for creating vibrant and diverse desktop backgrounds. This "unbe-leaf-able" correlation suggests that our virtual "terrain" may suffer when real-world crops are not "up to par." It's a reminder that when it comes to technology and agriculture, we're all "inter-connected!". Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vast cotton field in Mississippi, farmers are diligently planting non-GMO cotton seeds. The vibrant green leaves of the cotton plants sway in the wind under the clear blue sky. Meanwhile, in homes and offices across the state, people are typing "desktop background" into their Google search bars, hoping to find a new and unique image to personalize their computer screens. The connection between the two is emphasized by the lack of diverse fabric due to the decrease in GMO cotton, leading to fewer options for creating vibrant desktop backgrounds.

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: [ Realistic ] and depicting this scene: In a vast cotton field in Mississippi, farmers are diligently planting non-GMO cotton seeds. The vibrant green leaves of the cotton plants sway in the wind under the clear blue sky. Meanwhile, in homes and offices across the state, people are typing "desktop background" into their Google search bars, hoping to find a new and unique image to personalize their computer screens. The connection between the two is emphasized by the lack of diverse fabric due to the decrease in GMO cotton, leading to fewer options for creating vibrant desktop backgrounds. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a vast cotton field in Mississippi under a clear blue sky, with farmers diligently planting non-GMO cotton seeds. The vibrant green leaves of the cotton plants sway in the wind. Show people in homes and offices across the state typing "desktop background" into their Google search bars, emphasizing the connection between the decrease in diverse fabric due to the decrease in GMO cotton and the hunt for unique desktop backgrounds. Keep the visual depiction simple and realistic.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in GMO use in cotton in Mississippi caused desktop background (Google searches for 'desktop background') to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

Journal of Agricultural Absurdities

Jan 2024

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

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study examines the unexpected and seemingly unrelated connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. By leveraging data from the USDA and Google Trends, we have sought to shed light on this quirky correlation. Our findings reveal a surprisingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the time period spanning from 2007 to 2022. The results suggest that there may be a peculiar relationship between the adoption of GMOs in cotton cultivation and the public's interest in sprucing up their computer screens. Join us on this journey through the cotton fields and cyber realms as we unravel this enigmatic link.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The world of agricultural biotechnology and internet search trends may appear as distant as a farmer's field and a computer screen, but our research has uncovered an unexpected connection between the two. The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the cultivation of cotton in Mississippi, and the seemingly unrelated Google searches for 'desktop background', have come together in a peculiar dance of correlation. This study delves into the unexplored territory where the agricultural frontier meets the digital landscape, unearthing a connection that is as intriguing as it is amusing.
It is widely acknowledged that GMOs have been the subject of extensive debates and discussions in the agricultural realm, with proponents and opponents enriching the discourse with their contrasting perspectives. Similarly, the world of digital culture has its own set of curiosities, and among these is the fascination with customizing desktop backgrounds. The unlikely pairing of these two seemingly disparate topics has led us to delve deeper into uncharted territory, traversing the hallowed fields of Mississippi's cotton plantations to the virtual domains of internet searches.
The impetus for our investigation stems from the serendipitous discovery of a striking correspondence between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming and the level of interest expressed by internet users in adorning their screens with aesthetically pleasing background images. While our initial reaction was one of bemusement, the statistical robustness of the observed association has compelled us to embark on a rigorous inquiry, seeking to unravel the mysteries that underpin this enigmatic correlation.
In this paper, we present the findings of our investigation, unveiling the remarkably high correlation coefficient and statistically significant p-value that underscore the bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for enhancing their digital backdrop. Join us as we dissect this enthralling intersection of agricultural innovation and digital escapades, peeling back the layers of this unexpected connection to reveal the fascinating insights that lie beneath.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming and Google searches for 'desktop background' has not been extensively explored in the literature. A review of the existing academic research on GMOs in agriculture and digital culture yielded limited insights into this peculiar correlation. Smith et al. (2015) focused on the yield effects of GMO cotton in the southern United States, while Doe (2018) examined public perceptions and attitudes towards biotechnology in agriculture. Jones (2020) delved into the economic implications of GMO adoption on cotton farms.

Turning to non-fiction books, "The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals" by Michael Pollan and "Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies" by Jared Diamond provided valuable perspectives on agricultural practices and societal developments. However, these sources did not shed light on the surprising intersection of cotton GMOs and desktop background searches.

Venturing into the realm of fiction, "The Martian" by Andy Weir and "Neuromancer" by William Gibson offered imaginative portrayals of futuristic landscapes, but unfortunately did not offer any clues on the bond between genetically modified cotton and digital wallpapers.

In an effort to capture the zeitgeist of digital culture, the researchers turned to the world of television, immersing themselves in shows such as "Black Mirror" and "Stranger Things". Alas, while these series showcased the captivating allure of technology, they did not directly address the quirky relationship between GMO cotton and desktop backgrounds.

The absence of substantial literature on this specific topic motivated the researchers to fill this gap through their own investigation, melding the worlds of agricultural biotechnology and digital fascination to unravel the enigmatic correlation between cotton GMOs and desktop background searches.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft 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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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 Google Trends . You used data from 2007 to 2022

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study examines the unexpected and seemingly unrelated connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. By leveraging data from the USDA and Google Trends, we have sought to shed light on this quirky correlation. Our findings reveal a surprisingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the time period spanning from 2007 to 2022. The results suggest that there may be a peculiar relationship between the adoption of GMOs in cotton cultivation and the public's interest in sprucing up their computer screens. Join us on this journey through the cotton fields and cyber realms as we unravel this enigmatic link.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The world of agricultural biotechnology and internet search trends may appear as distant as a farmer's field and a computer screen, but our research has uncovered an unexpected connection between the two. The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the cultivation of cotton in Mississippi, and the seemingly unrelated Google searches for 'desktop background', have come together in a peculiar dance of correlation. This study delves into the unexplored territory where the agricultural frontier meets the digital landscape, unearthing a connection that is as intriguing as it is amusing.
It is widely acknowledged that GMOs have been the subject of extensive debates and discussions in the agricultural realm, with proponents and opponents enriching the discourse with their contrasting perspectives. Similarly, the world of digital culture has its own set of curiosities, and among these is the fascination with customizing desktop backgrounds. The unlikely pairing of these two seemingly disparate topics has led us to delve deeper into uncharted territory, traversing the hallowed fields of Mississippi's cotton plantations to the virtual domains of internet searches.
The impetus for our investigation stems from the serendipitous discovery of a striking correspondence between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming and the level of interest expressed by internet users in adorning their screens with aesthetically pleasing background images. While our initial reaction was one of bemusement, the statistical robustness of the observed association has compelled us to embark on a rigorous inquiry, seeking to unravel the mysteries that underpin this enigmatic correlation.
In this paper, we present the findings of our investigation, unveiling the remarkably high correlation coefficient and statistically significant p-value that underscore the bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for enhancing their digital backdrop. Join us as we dissect this enthralling intersection of agricultural innovation and digital escapades, peeling back the layers of this unexpected connection to reveal the fascinating insights that lie beneath.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The data for this study were collected from a variety of sources, primarily from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Google Trends. To obtain cotton GMO adoption data, we trawled through USDA reports, sifted through agricultural databases, and navigated the virtual labyrinth of government websites. We meticulously harvested information on the use of GMOs in cotton farming in Mississippi, and weeded out any irrelevant data to ensure the purity of our dataset.

In parallel, data on Google searches for 'desktop background' were harvested from Google Trends with the precision of a cotton picker carefully selecting the choicest bolls. Our team employed sophisticated search algorithms to plow through the vast digital fields of search queries, harvesting the relevant data with the dexterity of a skilled farmer.

Data Analysis:
Once the data were gleaned, we employed a multi-faceted approach to unravel the connection between cotton GMO adoption and Google searches for desktop backgrounds. The data underwent rigorous scrutiny and statistical analysis, akin to the careful inspection of cotton fibers for quality and purity in the ginning process.

To examine the relationship between GMO adoption in cotton and the frequency of Google searches for desktop backgrounds, we utilized a combination of time-series analysis, regression models, and correlation tests. Just as different varieties of cotton plants intertwine and cross-pollinate, so too did our statistical methods integrate in a harmonious union to reveal patterns in the data.

Additionally, we conducted a series of sensitivity analyses and robustness checks to ensure that our findings were not mere statistical chaff, but robust and reliable indicators of the phenomenon at hand. These analyses served as a kind of digital defoliant, shedding light on the nuances of the relationship between GMO use in cotton and the fluctuations in desktop background searches.

Time Period:
The study encompassed data from the years 2007 to 2022, allowing us to capture long-term trends and fluctuations in cotton GMO adoption and Google search behavior. This extensive time period allowed us to observe how the relationship between these seemingly disparate phenomena evolved over time, akin to how cotton plants grow and develop across seasons.

Limitations:
It is important to acknowledge the limitations of our study. Despite the meticulous nature of our data collection and analyses, the nature of observational data inherently precludes us from establishing definitive causal relationships. Furthermore, while our statistical methods provide compelling evidence of a correlation, they do not elucidate the underlying mechanisms driving the observed relationship.

Overall, the methodology employed in this study amalgamated elements of agricultural science and digital analytics, traversing the realms of cotton fields and internet searches to unearth a correlation that is as unexpected as it is intriguing.

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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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 Google Trends .

For the time period 2007 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9024337, r-squared of 0.8143867, 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]]
Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study examines the unexpected and seemingly unrelated connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. By leveraging data from the USDA and Google Trends, we have sought to shed light on this quirky correlation. Our findings reveal a surprisingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the time period spanning from 2007 to 2022. The results suggest that there may be a peculiar relationship between the adoption of GMOs in cotton cultivation and the public's interest in sprucing up their computer screens. Join us on this journey through the cotton fields and cyber realms as we unravel this enigmatic link.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The world of agricultural biotechnology and internet search trends may appear as distant as a farmer's field and a computer screen, but our research has uncovered an unexpected connection between the two. The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the cultivation of cotton in Mississippi, and the seemingly unrelated Google searches for 'desktop background', have come together in a peculiar dance of correlation. This study delves into the unexplored territory where the agricultural frontier meets the digital landscape, unearthing a connection that is as intriguing as it is amusing.
It is widely acknowledged that GMOs have been the subject of extensive debates and discussions in the agricultural realm, with proponents and opponents enriching the discourse with their contrasting perspectives. Similarly, the world of digital culture has its own set of curiosities, and among these is the fascination with customizing desktop backgrounds. The unlikely pairing of these two seemingly disparate topics has led us to delve deeper into uncharted territory, traversing the hallowed fields of Mississippi's cotton plantations to the virtual domains of internet searches.
The impetus for our investigation stems from the serendipitous discovery of a striking correspondence between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming and the level of interest expressed by internet users in adorning their screens with aesthetically pleasing background images. While our initial reaction was one of bemusement, the statistical robustness of the observed association has compelled us to embark on a rigorous inquiry, seeking to unravel the mysteries that underpin this enigmatic correlation.
In this paper, we present the findings of our investigation, unveiling the remarkably high correlation coefficient and statistically significant p-value that underscore the bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for enhancing their digital backdrop. Join us as we dissect this enthralling intersection of agricultural innovation and digital escapades, peeling back the layers of this unexpected connection to reveal the fascinating insights that lie beneath.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation revealed a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Furthermore, the calculated r-squared value of 0.8143867 indicated that approximately 81.44% of the variation in the frequency of 'desktop background' searches could be explained by the variation in GMO use in cotton. The p-value of less than 0.01 provided strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between these variables, further bolstering the statistical robustness of the observed association.

Upon visualizing the relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) depicted a strikingly linear pattern, illustrating the tight bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for sprucing up their computer screens with captivating backgrounds. It seems that the cotton fields may have a more significant impact on our digital aesthetics than one might have imagined.

These findings prompt us to consider the intriguing possibility that the cultivation of GMO cotton in Mississippi may somehow be imbuing the public with a heightened appreciation for visually appealing desktop backgrounds. Perhaps the very genetic modifications engineered to enhance cotton production have inadvertently stimulated a parallel fascination with enhancing the visual appeal of computer screens. It appears that the effects of GMOs extend beyond the agricultural realm and permeate into the virtual domains of internet searches, adding a whimsical twist to the narrative of biotechnological influence.

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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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]]
Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study examines the unexpected and seemingly unrelated connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. By leveraging data from the USDA and Google Trends, we have sought to shed light on this quirky correlation. Our findings reveal a surprisingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the time period spanning from 2007 to 2022. The results suggest that there may be a peculiar relationship between the adoption of GMOs in cotton cultivation and the public's interest in sprucing up their computer screens. Join us on this journey through the cotton fields and cyber realms as we unravel this enigmatic link.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming and Google searches for 'desktop background' has not been extensively explored in the literature. A review of the existing academic research on GMOs in agriculture and digital culture yielded limited insights into this peculiar correlation. Smith et al. (2015) focused on the yield effects of GMO cotton in the southern United States, while Doe (2018) examined public perceptions and attitudes towards biotechnology in agriculture. Jones (2020) delved into the economic implications of GMO adoption on cotton farms.
Turning to non-fiction books, "The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals" by Michael Pollan and "Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies" by Jared Diamond provided valuable perspectives on agricultural practices and societal developments. However, these sources did not shed light on the surprising intersection of cotton GMOs and desktop background searches.
Venturing into the realm of fiction, "The Martian" by Andy Weir and "Neuromancer" by William Gibson offered imaginative portrayals of futuristic landscapes, but unfortunately did not offer any clues on the bond between genetically modified cotton and digital wallpapers.
In an effort to capture the zeitgeist of digital culture, the researchers turned to the world of television, immersing themselves in shows such as "Black Mirror" and "Stranger Things". Alas, while these series showcased the captivating allure of technology, they did not directly address the quirky relationship between GMO cotton and desktop backgrounds.
The absence of substantial literature on this specific topic motivated the researchers to fill this gap through their own investigation, melding the worlds of agricultural biotechnology and digital fascination to unravel the enigmatic correlation between cotton GMOs and desktop background searches.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation revealed a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Furthermore, the calculated r-squared value of 0.8143867 indicated that approximately 81.44% of the variation in the frequency of 'desktop background' searches could be explained by the variation in GMO use in cotton. The p-value of less than 0.01 provided strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between these variables, further bolstering the statistical robustness of the observed association.
Upon visualizing the relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) depicted a strikingly linear pattern, illustrating the tight bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for sprucing up their computer screens with captivating backgrounds. It seems that the cotton fields may have a more significant impact on our digital aesthetics than one might have imagined.
These findings prompt us to consider the intriguing possibility that the cultivation of GMO cotton in Mississippi may somehow be imbuing the public with a heightened appreciation for visually appealing desktop backgrounds. Perhaps the very genetic modifications engineered to enhance cotton production have inadvertently stimulated a parallel fascination with enhancing the visual appeal of computer screens. It appears that the effects of GMOs extend beyond the agricultural realm and permeate into the virtual domains of internet searches, adding a whimsical twist to the narrative of biotechnological influence.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The unexpectedly high correlation coefficient between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background' provides a whimsical twist to the narrative of biotechnological influence. Our findings lend support to the sparse existing literature, which hinted at the potential interplay between agricultural practices and societal behaviors.

It is intriguing to ponder how the lush cotton fields of Mississippi might be exerting an influence on virtual landscapes, fostering a heightened interest in visually captivating computer backgrounds. The magnitude of the correlation coefficient and the statistical significance of the relationship underscore the robustness of this peculiar link. While prior research had primarily focused on the agricultural, economic, and public perception aspects of GMOs in cotton cultivation, the present study showcases a hitherto unexplored dimension of the societal impact of biotechnology.

The literature review playfully touched on the lack of guidance from non-fiction books and fictional works on this esoteric correlation, underscoring the novelty and intrigue surrounding this unexpected relationship. The literature's omission of substantial insight into this specific topic only serves to underscore the remarkable originality and novelty of our investigation.

These results prompt a reevaluation of the comprehensive reach of biotechnological influences and emphasize the need for multidisciplinary perspectives in understanding the far-reaching impact of agricultural innovations. The peculiar connection between cotton GMOs and cyber aesthetics serves as a reminder of the intricate and often unforeseen ways in which technological advancements permeate diverse aspects of human experience.

It is worth noting that our study, while firmly establishing the presence of a correlation, does not elucidate the underlying mechanisms driving this intriguing relationship. Future research avenues could explore the psychological and sociocultural underpinnings of this phenomenon, delving into how the visual stimulus from GMO-enhanced cotton landscapes might be subtly shaping digital preferences. Additionally, investigating whether this relationship extends to other crops or regions could provide further insights into the generalizability and scope of this whimsical association.

The enigmatic bond between cotton GMOs and desktop background searches offers a delightful blend of agricultural and virtual intrigue, underscoring the unforeseen consequences and quirky connections that underpin the intricacies of human behavior and societal trends.

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 Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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]]
Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study examines the unexpected and seemingly unrelated connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. By leveraging data from the USDA and Google Trends, we have sought to shed light on this quirky correlation. Our findings reveal a surprisingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the time period spanning from 2007 to 2022. The results suggest that there may be a peculiar relationship between the adoption of GMOs in cotton cultivation and the public's interest in sprucing up their computer screens. Join us on this journey through the cotton fields and cyber realms as we unravel this enigmatic link.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The world of agricultural biotechnology and internet search trends may appear as distant as a farmer's field and a computer screen, but our research has uncovered an unexpected connection between the two. The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the cultivation of cotton in Mississippi, and the seemingly unrelated Google searches for 'desktop background', have come together in a peculiar dance of correlation. This study delves into the unexplored territory where the agricultural frontier meets the digital landscape, unearthing a connection that is as intriguing as it is amusing.
It is widely acknowledged that GMOs have been the subject of extensive debates and discussions in the agricultural realm, with proponents and opponents enriching the discourse with their contrasting perspectives. Similarly, the world of digital culture has its own set of curiosities, and among these is the fascination with customizing desktop backgrounds. The unlikely pairing of these two seemingly disparate topics has led us to delve deeper into uncharted territory, traversing the hallowed fields of Mississippi's cotton plantations to the virtual domains of internet searches.
The impetus for our investigation stems from the serendipitous discovery of a striking correspondence between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming and the level of interest expressed by internet users in adorning their screens with aesthetically pleasing background images. While our initial reaction was one of bemusement, the statistical robustness of the observed association has compelled us to embark on a rigorous inquiry, seeking to unravel the mysteries that underpin this enigmatic correlation.
In this paper, we present the findings of our investigation, unveiling the remarkably high correlation coefficient and statistically significant p-value that underscore the bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for enhancing their digital backdrop. Join us as we dissect this enthralling intersection of agricultural innovation and digital escapades, peeling back the layers of this unexpected connection to reveal the fascinating insights that lie beneath.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation revealed a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Furthermore, the calculated r-squared value of 0.8143867 indicated that approximately 81.44% of the variation in the frequency of 'desktop background' searches could be explained by the variation in GMO use in cotton. The p-value of less than 0.01 provided strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between these variables, further bolstering the statistical robustness of the observed association.
Upon visualizing the relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) depicted a strikingly linear pattern, illustrating the tight bond between GMO use in cotton and the public's penchant for sprucing up their computer screens with captivating backgrounds. It seems that the cotton fields may have a more significant impact on our digital aesthetics than one might have imagined.
These findings prompt us to consider the intriguing possibility that the cultivation of GMO cotton in Mississippi may somehow be imbuing the public with a heightened appreciation for visually appealing desktop backgrounds. Perhaps the very genetic modifications engineered to enhance cotton production have inadvertently stimulated a parallel fascination with enhancing the visual appeal of computer screens. It appears that the effects of GMOs extend beyond the agricultural realm and permeate into the virtual domains of internet searches, adding a whimsical twist to the narrative of biotechnological influence.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation has unearthed a captivating correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and the frequency of Google searches for 'desktop background'. The remarkably high correlation coefficient and statistically significant p-value have illuminated a connection that is as unexpected as it is amusing. It appears that the cotton fields of Mississippi may be casting a glow on the digital realms, inspiring the public to embark on a quest for aesthetically pleasing desktop backgrounds.

The visual representation of the relationship in the scatterplot (Fig. 1) paints a picture of a bond as tight as a farmer's knot, demonstrating a linear pattern that defies the conventional boundaries of agricultural and digital domains. The whimsical twist in this narrative begs the question: are the genetic modifications in cotton plants sowing the seeds of an appreciation for visual aesthetics in the cyber world? It seems that the effects of biotechnological innovation may extend far beyond the confines of the agricultural landscape, reaching into the uncharted territories of internet search trends.

While the findings of our study shed light on this peculiar correlation, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of our research. The exact mechanisms underlying this connection remain shrouded in mystery, inviting further speculation and inquiry. Nevertheless, our investigation has paved the way for a new perspective on the potential impact of agricultural biotechnology on the public's digital predilections.

In light of these findings, it is evident that no more research is needed in this area. The quirky relationship between GMO use in cotton farming and Google searches for 'desktop background' stands as a testament to the unexpected twists and turns of scientific inquiry, proving that even the most unlikely pairings can yield intriguing insights. As we bid adieu to this enigmatic correlation, we are reminded that the world of research is never short on surprises.

After all, who would have thought that GMOs in cotton could make your desktop glow?

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 Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Agricultural Absurdities

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 Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Illuminating Agricultural Advancements

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 Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow? with an abstract of This study examines the unexpected and seemingly unrelated connection between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Mississippi and Google searches for 'desktop background'. By leveraging data from the USDA and Google Trends, we have sought to shed light on this quirky correlation. Our findings reveal a surprisingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9024337 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the time period spanning from 2007 to 2022. The results suggest that there may be a peculiar relationship between the adoption of GMOs in cotton cultivation and the public's interest in sprucing up their computer screens. Join us on this journey through the cotton fields and cyber realms as we unravel this enigmatic link.

ChatGPT:

cotton farming, genetically modified organisms, GMOs, cotton cultivation, Mississippi, Google searches, desktop background, USDA data, Google Trends, correlation coefficient, statistically significant, cotton fields, cyber realms

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

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

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

Correlation r = 0.9024337 (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 = 0.8143867 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 81.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'desktop background') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Mississippi) over the 16 years from 2007 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.7E-6.^Show 0.0000017376841198497295000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.9 in 0.00017% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 575,479 random variables^Note You don't actually need 575 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 15 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 15 because we have two variables measured over a period of 16 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.74, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.

	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022
GMO use in cotton in Mississippi (GMO cotton %)	16	19	14	12	15	9	2	2	1	3	8	2	1	2	1	1
Google searches for 'desktop background' (Rel. search volume)	81.8333	86.5	75.3333	66.1667	60.3333	54.75	46.1667	41.9167	38.8333	30.5833	26.75	23.9167	22.4167	24.75	20	22.25

Why this works

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

Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([16,19,14,12,15,9,2,2,1,3,8,2,1,2,1,1,])
array_2 = np.array([81.8333,86.5,75.3333,66.1667,60.3333,54.75,46.1667,41.9167,38.8333,30.5833,26.75,23.9167,22.4167,24.75,20,22.25,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in Mississippi"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'desktop background'"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only GMO use in cotton in Mississippi
Line chart for only Google searches for 'desktop background'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Cotton GMO: Does It Make Your Desktop Glow?

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is pure awesomeness!

Correlation ID: 2469 · Black Variable ID: 772 · Red Variable ID: 1462


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