about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,535 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the second variable is Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Birds strategically intercept the raindrops, causing them to veer off course and directly into the opposing team's field goals, giving the winning team a considerable advantage. It's all about avian aerial tactics raining on the other team's parade!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, split-screen with one side featuring a computer screen displaying multiple Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', while the other side shows a football field where the winning team in the Super Bowl is making a triumphant touchdown, their determination shining through as they soar through the air towards the end zone. The computer screen should be glowing softly, and the football field should be visible under stadium lights, with the players and crowd cheering in the background. 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: Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Cute cartoon Sci-fi fantacy Cybernetic art Hyper-realistic
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl, in the following situation: As the curiosity about avian rain shelters grows, so does the determination of the winning team in the Super Bowl to soar above their competition. When more people wonder about bird rain habits, it creates a cosmic energy that propels the winning team to score more points. It's as if the football gods are saying, "If the birds can find dry havens, then we can find the end zone!". Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: The scene shows a split-screen with one side featuring a computer screen displaying multiple Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', while the other side shows a football field where the winning team in the Super Bowl is making a triumphant touchdown, their determination shining through as they soar through the air towards the end zone.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: The scene shows a split-screen with one side featuring a computer screen displaying multiple Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', while the other side shows a football field where the winning team in the Super Bowl is making a triumphant touchdown, their determination shining through as they soar through the air towards the end zone. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, split-screen with one side featuring a computer screen displaying multiple Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', while the other side shows a football field where the winning team in the Super Bowl is making a triumphant touchdown, their determination shining through as they soar through the air towards the end zone. The computer screen should be glowing softly, and the football field should be visible under stadium lights, with the players and crowd cheering in the background.

*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 increases in where do birds go when it rains (Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains') positively influenced Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

The Journal of Sports Superstition and Meteorological Musings

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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from Google Trends and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866 and p < 0.05 for 2004 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]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.


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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION

The interplay between seemingly unrelated variables has long intrigued researchers in various fields, from the most esoteric academic pursuits to the most mundane leisurely inquiries. The serendipitous discovery of correlations between ostensibly disparate topics has led to many a raised eyebrow and quizzical expression. However, such unexpected connections often present an opportunity for scientific inquiry and new perspectives, even if the initial reactions may be met with skepticism or amusement.

In this research endeavor, we delve into the unanticipated relationship between the precipitation-related musings of the general public and the outcomes of the pinnacle of American gridiron spectacle, the Super Bowl. Specifically, we seek to explore the puzzling correlation between Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the triumphant team in this annual championship event. The unforeseen intersection of avian meteorological curiosities and gridiron prowess presents an intriguing conundrum, one that beckons to be deciphered.

Little did we anticipate that a seemingly innocuous query on the behavior of our feathered friends during inclement weather would lead to a statistical rendezvous with the pinnacle of American football excellence. The pursuit of knowledge often takes unexpected turns, and in this peculiar intersection of avian inquiries and athletic triumphs, we find ourselves venturing into uncharted territories of correlation and causation.

As we embark on this academic expedition, we shall endeavor to navigate the labyrinthine realms of trivia and touchdowns, aiming to discern the underlying mechanisms, if any, that may drive the observed relationship between these divergent domains. The unearthing of such an association challenges conventional wisdom and underscores the capricious nature of empirical inquiry, reminding us that scholarly pursuits need not always adhere to the trodden paths but can, at times, take flight on the wings of whimsy and wonder.


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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The interplay between seemingly unrelated variables has long intrigued researchers in various fields, from the most esoteric academic pursuits to the most mundane leisurely inquiries. The serendipitous discovery of correlations between ostensibly disparate topics has led to many a raised eyebrow and quizzical expression. However, such unexpected connections often present an opportunity for scientific inquiry and new perspectives, even if the initial reactions may be met with skepticism or amusement.
In this research endeavor, we delve into the unanticipated relationship between the precipitation-related musings of the general public and the outcomes of the pinnacle of American gridiron spectacle, the Super Bowl. Specifically, we seek to explore the puzzling correlation between Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the triumphant team in this annual championship event. The unforeseen intersection of avian meteorological curiosities and gridiron prowess presents an intriguing conundrum, one that beckons to be deciphered.
Little did we anticipate that a seemingly innocuous query on the behavior of our feathered friends during inclement weather would lead to a statistical rendezvous with the pinnacle of American football excellence. The pursuit of knowledge often takes unexpected turns, and in this peculiar intersection of avian inquiries and athletic triumphs, we find ourselves venturing into uncharted territories of correlation and causation.
As we embark on this academic expedition, we shall endeavor to navigate the labyrinthine realms of trivia and touchdowns, aiming to discern the underlying mechanisms, if any, that may drive the observed relationship between these divergent domains. The unearthing of such an association challenges conventional wisdom and underscores the capricious nature of empirical inquiry, reminding us that scholarly pursuits need not always adhere to the trodden paths but can, at times, take flight on the wings of whimsy and wonder.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The unexpected nexus between public inquiries about avian responses to precipitation and the performance of the triumphant team in the Super Bowl has garnered attention from scholars and observers alike. In "Smith et al.," the authors discuss the intriguing interplay between seemingly unrelated phenomena, laying the groundwork for investigations into the uncharted territories of statistical curiosity. Similarly, Doe and Jones present a comprehensive analysis of obscure correlations, proffering insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the whimsical linkage between inclement weather inquiries and athletic achievements.

Moreover, "Where Do Birds Go When It Rains: A Comprehensive Study" by Lorem and Ipsum provides an in-depth exploration of avian meteorological behavioral patterns, shedding light on the enigmatic proclivities of our feathered counterparts during precipitous events. This body of work stands as a beacon of avian-related research and offers invaluable insights into the physiological and instinctual responses of birds to inclement weather conditions.

In a divergent paradigm, "The Science of Super Bowls" by Factus and Fictionalis delves into the multifaceted intricacies of American football championships, offering a comprehensive analysis of the historical and contemporary aspects of this iconic sporting event. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated bodies of literature serves as a testament to the unanticipated convergence of avian meteorological queries and athletic triumphs in the annals of empirical inquiry.

Further still, the fictional works "Tales of Tackles and Tweets" by Novelistica and "Touchdowns and Tweeting Teapots" by Imaginaria et al. offer imaginative narratives that whimsically intersect avian trivia and athletic prowess, introducing an element of fanciful exploration into this unconventional scholarly pursuit.

Turning to the realms of visual media, the investigation of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns led the researchers to uncover valuable insights from children's cartoons and animated series. The incorrigible duo in "Rainy Day Riddles: Feathery Fables" and the plucky avian protagonists in "Super Bowl Sparrows: Touchdown Tales" offer endearing portrayals of avian meteorological enigmas and sporting triumphs, providing a relatable entry point for scholarly endeavors within this curious domain.


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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Wikipedia . You used data from 2004 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]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The interplay between seemingly unrelated variables has long intrigued researchers in various fields, from the most esoteric academic pursuits to the most mundane leisurely inquiries. The serendipitous discovery of correlations between ostensibly disparate topics has led to many a raised eyebrow and quizzical expression. However, such unexpected connections often present an opportunity for scientific inquiry and new perspectives, even if the initial reactions may be met with skepticism or amusement.
In this research endeavor, we delve into the unanticipated relationship between the precipitation-related musings of the general public and the outcomes of the pinnacle of American gridiron spectacle, the Super Bowl. Specifically, we seek to explore the puzzling correlation between Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the triumphant team in this annual championship event. The unforeseen intersection of avian meteorological curiosities and gridiron prowess presents an intriguing conundrum, one that beckons to be deciphered.
Little did we anticipate that a seemingly innocuous query on the behavior of our feathered friends during inclement weather would lead to a statistical rendezvous with the pinnacle of American football excellence. The pursuit of knowledge often takes unexpected turns, and in this peculiar intersection of avian inquiries and athletic triumphs, we find ourselves venturing into uncharted territories of correlation and causation.
As we embark on this academic expedition, we shall endeavor to navigate the labyrinthine realms of trivia and touchdowns, aiming to discern the underlying mechanisms, if any, that may drive the observed relationship between these divergent domains. The unearthing of such an association challenges conventional wisdom and underscores the capricious nature of empirical inquiry, reminding us that scholarly pursuits need not always adhere to the trodden paths but can, at times, take flight on the wings of whimsy and wonder.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Acquisition:
The data for this study were obtained primarily from Google Trends, a robust tool for analyzing search query volumes, and from the venerable fount of crowd-sourced knowledge, Wikipedia. The search query "where do birds go when it rains" was selected as the primary investigatory thread for avian precipitation-related ponderings, while the pivotal parameter of interest in the Super Bowl context was the points scored by the triumphant team. The search data spanned the years 2004 to 2022, encompassing a wealth of avian curiosity and gridiron glory.

Data Processing:
In order to process the Google search data, the search query for avian precipitation musings was meticulously monitored on a monthly basis for each year under examination. The search volumes were then aggregated to yield a comprehensive time series dataset, reflecting the collective inquisitiveness of the internet populace regarding the rainfall-induced whereabouts of our feathered counterparts. Similarly, the points scored by the victorious team in the Super Bowl were collated and standardized for comparative analysis.

Correlation Analysis:
Employing statistical software, the extracted data from Google Trends and the archival records of Super Bowl results were subjected to a rigorous correlation analysis. The Pearson correlation coefficient, a measure of the linear relationship between two variables, was computed to assess the strength and direction of the potential association between the volume of searches for precipitation-seeking avians and the points accrued by the triumphant team.

Control Variables:
To strengthen the validity of our findings, numerous control variables were considered in the analysis, including meteorological data on actual precipitation levels during the Super Bowl events, as well as demographic factors that might influence internet search behavior. Additionally, the performance metrics of the competing teams and any potential confounding variables within the realm of avian behavior were scrutinized to elucidate the nuanced interplay between public curiosity and sporting success.

Confounding Factors:
Extensive efforts were made to identify and mitigate the influence of confounding factors that could spuriously inflate the observed correlations. While it is acknowledged that unforeseen intricacies may underpin the relationship between avian precipitation inquiries and gridiron triumphs, utmost care was taken to unravel the genuine nature of this connection, devoid of any undue confoundment-related perturbations.

Limitations:
It is important to note that this study, despite its meticulous design, is not immune to limitations. The reliance on internet search data inherently introduces potential biases stemming from the composition of the online user base, and the retrospective nature of the analysis precludes causal inference. Furthermore, the multifaceted dynamics underlying the human penchant for whimsical inquiries and the unpredictable outcomes of athletic contests warrant caution in the interpretation of the observed relationships.

In no sense was the data collection deliberately designed to be "for the birds," yet the unexpected resonance of avian precipitation ponderings with Super Bowl triumphs incites inquisitiveness and hints at a serendipitous charm nestled within this seemingly incongruent synthesis of themes.


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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Wikipedia .

For the time period 2004 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.5044866, r-squared of 0.2545067, and p < 0.05.

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]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The interplay between seemingly unrelated variables has long intrigued researchers in various fields, from the most esoteric academic pursuits to the most mundane leisurely inquiries. The serendipitous discovery of correlations between ostensibly disparate topics has led to many a raised eyebrow and quizzical expression. However, such unexpected connections often present an opportunity for scientific inquiry and new perspectives, even if the initial reactions may be met with skepticism or amusement.
In this research endeavor, we delve into the unanticipated relationship between the precipitation-related musings of the general public and the outcomes of the pinnacle of American gridiron spectacle, the Super Bowl. Specifically, we seek to explore the puzzling correlation between Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the triumphant team in this annual championship event. The unforeseen intersection of avian meteorological curiosities and gridiron prowess presents an intriguing conundrum, one that beckons to be deciphered.
Little did we anticipate that a seemingly innocuous query on the behavior of our feathered friends during inclement weather would lead to a statistical rendezvous with the pinnacle of American football excellence. The pursuit of knowledge often takes unexpected turns, and in this peculiar intersection of avian inquiries and athletic triumphs, we find ourselves venturing into uncharted territories of correlation and causation.
As we embark on this academic expedition, we shall endeavor to navigate the labyrinthine realms of trivia and touchdowns, aiming to discern the underlying mechanisms, if any, that may drive the observed relationship between these divergent domains. The unearthing of such an association challenges conventional wisdom and underscores the capricious nature of empirical inquiry, reminding us that scholarly pursuits need not always adhere to the trodden paths but can, at times, take flight on the wings of whimsy and wonder.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data revealed a statistically significant correlation between the volume of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" and the points scored by the winning team in the Super Bowl from 2004 to 2022. The correlation coefficient was computed at 0.5044866, with an r-squared value of 0.2545067, indicating that approximately 25.45% of the variation in the Super Bowl game outcomes can be explained by the fluctuations in the search queries regarding avian precipitation avoidance strategies. The p-value was found to be less than 0.05, suggesting that the observed correlation is unlikely to have occurred by mere chance, further bolstering the validity of the relationship.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually demonstrates the robust connection between the two variables, depicting a discernible pattern of increase in points scored by the winning team as the volume of searches for avian rain shelter locations surges. The data points form a striking alignment, akin to the majestic V-formation of migratory birds traversing the analytical skies, echoing the harmonious convergence of avian inquisition and athletic triumph. While these findings undoubtedly raise eyebrows, they also raise a question: could there be a hidden strategy behind the enigmatic synergy of "fowl" weather ponderings and football feats?


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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The unexpected nexus between public inquiries about avian responses to precipitation and the performance of the triumphant team in the Super Bowl has garnered attention from scholars and observers alike. In "Smith et al.," the authors discuss the intriguing interplay between seemingly unrelated phenomena, laying the groundwork for investigations into the uncharted territories of statistical curiosity. Similarly, Doe and Jones present a comprehensive analysis of obscure correlations, proffering insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the whimsical linkage between inclement weather inquiries and athletic achievements.
Moreover, "Where Do Birds Go When It Rains: A Comprehensive Study" by Lorem and Ipsum provides an in-depth exploration of avian meteorological behavioral patterns, shedding light on the enigmatic proclivities of our feathered counterparts during precipitous events. This body of work stands as a beacon of avian-related research and offers invaluable insights into the physiological and instinctual responses of birds to inclement weather conditions.
In a divergent paradigm, "The Science of Super Bowls" by Factus and Fictionalis delves into the multifaceted intricacies of American football championships, offering a comprehensive analysis of the historical and contemporary aspects of this iconic sporting event. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated bodies of literature serves as a testament to the unanticipated convergence of avian meteorological queries and athletic triumphs in the annals of empirical inquiry.
Further still, the fictional works "Tales of Tackles and Tweets" by Novelistica and "Touchdowns and Tweeting Teapots" by Imaginaria et al. offer imaginative narratives that whimsically intersect avian trivia and athletic prowess, introducing an element of fanciful exploration into this unconventional scholarly pursuit.
Turning to the realms of visual media, the investigation of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns led the researchers to uncover valuable insights from children's cartoons and animated series. The incorrigible duo in "Rainy Day Riddles: Feathery Fables" and the plucky avian protagonists in "Super Bowl Sparrows: Touchdown Tales" offer endearing portrayals of avian meteorological enigmas and sporting triumphs, providing a relatable entry point for scholarly endeavors within this curious domain.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a statistically significant correlation between the volume of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" and the points scored by the winning team in the Super Bowl from 2004 to 2022. The correlation coefficient was computed at 0.5044866, with an r-squared value of 0.2545067, indicating that approximately 25.45% of the variation in the Super Bowl game outcomes can be explained by the fluctuations in the search queries regarding avian precipitation avoidance strategies. The p-value was found to be less than 0.05, suggesting that the observed correlation is unlikely to have occurred by mere chance, further bolstering the validity of the relationship.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually demonstrates the robust connection between the two variables, depicting a discernible pattern of increase in points scored by the winning team as the volume of searches for avian rain shelter locations surges. The data points form a striking alignment, akin to the majestic V-formation of migratory birds traversing the analytical skies, echoing the harmonious convergence of avian inquisition and athletic triumph. While these findings undoubtedly raise eyebrows, they also raise a question: could there be a hidden strategy behind the enigmatic synergy of "fowl" weather ponderings and football feats?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The emergence of a statistically significant correlation between Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" and the points scored by the winning team in the Super Bowl from 2004 to 2022 resonates with prior research that has delved into the curious confluence of seemingly incongruous phenomena. The proactive role played by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones in highlighting the potential interconnectedness of unrelated variables has indeed laid an academically robust foundation for our current investigation. Furthermore, Lorem and Ipsum's comprehensive study of avian meteorological behavioral patterns has offered invaluable insights into the intricate world of avian precipitation responses, which, in hindsight, paved the way for unraveling the unanticipated connection between avian curiosity and athletic success.

Moreover, the rigorous exploration of the "Science of Super Bowls" by Factus and Fictionalis has broadened our understanding of the multifaceted dynamics of this iconic sporting event, inadvertently setting the stage for our investigation into the whimsical world of trivia and touchdowns. It is worth noting that the fascinating narratives presented in the works "Tales of Tackles and Tweets" and "Touchdowns and Tweeting Teapots" have introduced an element of imaginative fervor into this scholarly pursuit, underscoring the capacious nature of empirical inquiry.

The statistically significant association between public interest in avian precipitation avoidance strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the Super Bowl aligns with the spirit of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns, as elegantly portrayed in children's cartoons and animated series such as "Rainy Day Riddles: Feathery Fables" and "Super Bowl Sparrows: Touchdown Tales." The whimsical portrayal of avian meteorological enigmas and sporting triumphs in these visual media forms has not only enriched our understanding but has also imbued our scholarly pursuits with an endearing appeal.

The findings of this study resonate with the wit and wisdom of prior investigations and serve as a testament to the unforeseen convergence of avian meteorological queries and athletic prowess in the annals of empirical inquiry. While the exact mechanisms underlying this peculiar correlation remain elusive, the data hint at a potentially enigmatic synergy between "fowl" weather ponderings and football feats, prompting further exploration into the whimsical world of interconnected trivial pursuits.


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 Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The interplay between seemingly unrelated variables has long intrigued researchers in various fields, from the most esoteric academic pursuits to the most mundane leisurely inquiries. The serendipitous discovery of correlations between ostensibly disparate topics has led to many a raised eyebrow and quizzical expression. However, such unexpected connections often present an opportunity for scientific inquiry and new perspectives, even if the initial reactions may be met with skepticism or amusement.
In this research endeavor, we delve into the unanticipated relationship between the precipitation-related musings of the general public and the outcomes of the pinnacle of American gridiron spectacle, the Super Bowl. Specifically, we seek to explore the puzzling correlation between Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the triumphant team in this annual championship event. The unforeseen intersection of avian meteorological curiosities and gridiron prowess presents an intriguing conundrum, one that beckons to be deciphered.
Little did we anticipate that a seemingly innocuous query on the behavior of our feathered friends during inclement weather would lead to a statistical rendezvous with the pinnacle of American football excellence. The pursuit of knowledge often takes unexpected turns, and in this peculiar intersection of avian inquiries and athletic triumphs, we find ourselves venturing into uncharted territories of correlation and causation.
As we embark on this academic expedition, we shall endeavor to navigate the labyrinthine realms of trivia and touchdowns, aiming to discern the underlying mechanisms, if any, that may drive the observed relationship between these divergent domains. The unearthing of such an association challenges conventional wisdom and underscores the capricious nature of empirical inquiry, reminding us that scholarly pursuits need not always adhere to the trodden paths but can, at times, take flight on the wings of whimsy and wonder.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a statistically significant correlation between the volume of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" and the points scored by the winning team in the Super Bowl from 2004 to 2022. The correlation coefficient was computed at 0.5044866, with an r-squared value of 0.2545067, indicating that approximately 25.45% of the variation in the Super Bowl game outcomes can be explained by the fluctuations in the search queries regarding avian precipitation avoidance strategies. The p-value was found to be less than 0.05, suggesting that the observed correlation is unlikely to have occurred by mere chance, further bolstering the validity of the relationship.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually demonstrates the robust connection between the two variables, depicting a discernible pattern of increase in points scored by the winning team as the volume of searches for avian rain shelter locations surges. The data points form a striking alignment, akin to the majestic V-formation of migratory birds traversing the analytical skies, echoing the harmonious convergence of avian inquisition and athletic triumph. While these findings undoubtedly raise eyebrows, they also raise a question: could there be a hidden strategy behind the enigmatic synergy of "fowl" weather ponderings and football feats?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

The surprising connection unveiled in this investigation between the public's curiosity about avian precipitation evasive tactics and the performance of the triumphant team in the Super Bowl presents a convoluted conundrum that transcends traditional expectations. It appears that the whims of the avian weather ponderings and the prowess of the gridiron gladiators may be more intertwined than previously conceived. While the statistical correlation between the two variables is quite striking, one must resist the temptation to jump to causative conclusions. As tempting as it may be to speculate on the impact of ornithological musings on the gridiron proficiency of American football teams, caution must prevail in attributing direct causation.

The findings of this study evoke a subtle yet discernible mirth, akin to the wry smile brought about by an unexpected punchline in a stand-up comedy routine. One cannot help but marvel at the seemingly nonsensical intertwining of inquiries regarding avian precipitation refuges and the prowess of Super Bowl champions. The fusion of these two seemingly unrelated domains beckons to the playful side of scholarly inquiry, reminding us that amidst the rigors of statistical analysis and methodological rigor, a touch of whimsy can occasionally infiltrate the hallowed halls of academic investigation.

In light of these revelatory yet confounding results, it becomes pertinent to acknowledge the limitations of this study. The inherent complexity of human behavior and the multifaceted dynamics of athletic competition render any singular causal explanation implausible. Additionally, while the statistical association between the Google search volume and Super Bowl outcomes remains robust, one must exercise prudence in making definitive extrapolations about the underlying mechanisms at play.

Ultimately, while this enigmatic correlation between enigmatic avian inquisitions and athletic triumphs may elicit a chuckle or two, it also underscores the capricious nature of empirical inquiry. Through this peculiar intersection, we are reminded that scholarly pursuits can indeed take flight on the wings of wonder and whimsy. However, it is crucial to recognize that despite the humor and befuddlement this correlation may provoke, caution and circumspection must guide any attempt to unravel the enigma.

In conclusion, the association uncovered by this study beckons for further curiosity and speculation, highlighting the intriguing interplay between seemingly disparate domains. However, in the realm of scholarly discourse, it is imperative to strike a balance between scholarly rigor and the alluring whimsy of unexpected correlations. As such, it may be best to refrain from diving too deeply into the whimsical world of avian weather musings and gridiron triumphs. To put it simply, this area does not warrant further investigation, as the findings may simply be a flight of fancy in the world of statistical correlations.

No more research is needed in this area.


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 Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Sports Superstition and Meteorological Musings


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 Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Meteorological Mirth and Munchies


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 Chirps and Chips: Do Rainy Day Riddles Ruffle the Super Bowl Result? with an abstract of This study explores the unexpected linkage between public curiosity about avian precipitation escape strategies and the performance of the victorious team in the annual American football championship, the Super Bowl. Leveraging data from Google Trends and Wikipedia, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between the volume of searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' and the points scored by the winning team from 2004 to 2022. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5044866, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting that there may be a non-spurious association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. These findings undoubtedly pose more queries than they answer, prompting further investigation into the whimsical world of interconnected trivia and triumphant touchdowns.

ChatGPT:

avian precipitation escape strategies, Super Bowl result, public curiosity, Google Trends, Wikipedia, correlation, winning team performance, annual American football championship, bird behavior in rain, Super Bowl scores, statistical significance, association between search volume and game performance, whimsical trivia, interconnected phenomena

*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

Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'

Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl

Correlation r = 0.5044866 (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 = 0.2545067 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 25.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains') over the 19 years from 2004 through 2022.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.028. 0.0276140253160681480000000000
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 0.5 in 2.8% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 36 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 18 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 18 because we have two variables measured over a period of 19 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.

[ 0.07, 0.78 ] 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.
2004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' (Rel. search volume)2.833332.250.6666671.416671.083330.8333331.166671.166670.9166670.7510.7532.083331.751.51.636361.916671.751.72727
Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl (Points scored)32242129172731312134432824343313313113




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.




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([2.83333,2.25,0.666667,1.41667,1.08333,0.833333,1.16667,1.16667,0.916667,0.75,10.75,3,2.08333,1.75,1.5,1.63636,1.91667,1.75,1.72727,])
array_2 = np.array([32,24,21,29,17,27,31,31,21,34,43,28,24,34,33,13,31,31,13,])
array_1_name = "Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'"
array_2_name = "Points Scored by Winning Team in Super Bowl"

# 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?

Thanks for shining a light on this correlation!


Correlation ID: 2535 · Black Variable ID: 1468 · Red Variable ID: 532
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0