about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,597 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and the second variable is Fossil fuel use in Cuba.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the GMO corn in Illinois flourished, it led to an a-MAIZE-ing surplus. This created a cornucopia of demand from Cuba, causing a GRAIN drain on agricultural resources and leading to a kernel of truth: that more GMO corn led to an ear-resistible need for transportation, hence fueling the Fidel-ity to fossil fuels in Cuba!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Given the style of [Symbolism], create an image of a surreal and abstract representation of the interconnected relationship between genetically modified corn production in Illinois and the dependence on fossil fuels in Cuba. Consider incorporating visual cues of immense cornstalks intertwining with oil tankers, evoking a sense of perplexing reliance and interconnectedness between agricultural and energy systems. Emphasize the urgency and turmoil of this relationship through contrasting visual elements, infusing the scene with a sense of surrealism and depth. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. 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: Glitch art a Polaroid photo Pop art Whimsical illustration Symbolism
ChatGPT: Symbolism

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba, in the following situation: The GM corn in Illinois was so productive that it created a kernel of dependency on fossil fuels in Cuba for transportation and trade. This led to a cob-founding increase in demand for fossil fuels, shelling out more money for imports and causing a real cornundrum for the Cuban economy. With Illinois corn crossing oceans and causing a maize of problems, it's clear that this situation is not just a-maize-ing, it's a-maize-ingly absurd.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a visual scene, imagine vast cornfields stretching across the landscape of Illinois, with genetically modified corn plants towering high. Meanwhile, in Cuba, large tankers and ships are seen unloading fossil fuel imports at the docks. The corn from Illinois is being loaded onto ships, creating a strong dependency on fossil fuels for transportation and trade. The scene is characterized by a sense of urgency and turmoil as the demand for fossil fuels in Cuba increases dramatically, impacting the country's economy. This linkage of GMO corn and fossil fuel dependency creates a perplexing and absurd situation, portraying the challenging and interconnected nature of global agricultural and energy systems.

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: [ Symbolism ] and depicting this scene: In a visual scene, imagine vast cornfields stretching across the landscape of Illinois, with genetically modified corn plants towering high. Meanwhile, in Cuba, large tankers and ships are seen unloading fossil fuel imports at the docks. The corn from Illinois is being loaded onto ships, creating a strong dependency on fossil fuels for transportation and trade. The scene is characterized by a sense of urgency and turmoil as the demand for fossil fuels in Cuba increases dramatically, impacting the country's economy. This linkage of GMO corn and fossil fuel dependency creates a perplexing and absurd situation, portraying the challenging and interconnected nature of global agricultural and energy systems. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Given the style of [Symbolism], create an image of a surreal and abstract representation of the interconnected relationship between genetically modified corn production in Illinois and the dependence on fossil fuels in Cuba. Consider incorporating visual cues of immense cornstalks intertwining with oil tankers, evoking a sense of perplexing reliance and interconnectedness between agricultural and energy systems. Emphasize the urgency and turmoil of this relationship through contrasting visual elements, infusing the scene with a sense of surrealism and depth.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba

The Journal of Agricultural Anecdotes

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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from USDA and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9745268 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2021.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Introduction

The intersection of agriculture and energy consumption has long been a fertile ground for research. In this paper, we delve into the often-cobbed world of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and their unlikely connection to fossil fuel consumption in Cuba. While this may sound like a kernel of an idea, our findings have unearthed a correlation that's more than just corny.

It's no secret that GMOs have been a hot potato in the realm of agriculture, sparking debates that can sometimes turn as heated as a popped corn kernel. Similarly, the topic of fossil fuel usage in Cuba may seem a world away from the cornfields of Illinois, but our research has uncovered a link that's as surprising as finding a corncob in a haystack.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team has cracked open the cob to reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient, which may leave some scratching their heads more than a cob of corn. But fear not, dear reader, as we aim to butter you up with compelling evidence and insights that will cornvince you of the meaningful connection we've unearthed.

As we embark on this journey through the cornfields of Illinois and the energy landscape of Cuba, we encourage you to lend us your ear and see for yourself the salky connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our research not only sheds light on the interplay between agricultural practices and energy consumption but also offers a-maize-ing food for thought in the world of scientific investigation.

So, grab your ear of corn and let's husk this mystery together, because when it comes to GMOs and fossil fuels, there's more than meets the husk!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The intersection of agriculture and energy consumption has long been a fertile ground for research. In this paper, we delve into the often-cobbed world of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and their unlikely connection to fossil fuel consumption in Cuba. While this may sound like a kernel of an idea, our findings have unearthed a correlation that's more than just corny.
It's no secret that GMOs have been a hot potato in the realm of agriculture, sparking debates that can sometimes turn as heated as a popped corn kernel. Similarly, the topic of fossil fuel usage in Cuba may seem a world away from the cornfields of Illinois, but our research has uncovered a link that's as surprising as finding a corncob in a haystack.
Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team has cracked open the cob to reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient, which may leave some scratching their heads more than a cob of corn. But fear not, dear reader, as we aim to butter you up with compelling evidence and insights that will cornvince you of the meaningful connection we've unearthed.
As we embark on this journey through the cornfields of Illinois and the energy landscape of Cuba, we encourage you to lend us your ear and see for yourself the salky connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our research not only sheds light on the interplay between agricultural practices and energy consumption but also offers a-maize-ing food for thought in the world of scientific investigation.
So, grab your ear of corn and let's husk this mystery together, because when it comes to GMOs and fossil fuels, there's more than meets the husk!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The burgeoning evidence on the relationship between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba has attracted significant scholarly attention in recent years. Smith et al. (2018) conducted a comprehensive study examining the impact of GMO adoption on agricultural practices, while simultaneously considering its potential ripple effects on energy consumption. Their findings underscore the complex interplay between genetically modified corn and the broader environmental landscape, prompting further investigation into the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate phenomena.

In "The Corn Conundrum: Unraveling the Mysteries of GMOs and Energy" by Doe (2017), the author delves into the intricate web of corn genetics and its implications for energy utilization. The study illuminates the various dimensions of GMO cultivation, shedding light on how these practices may reverberate across different geographical regions. Doe's work serves as a poignant reminder of the tangled relationship between agricultural innovation and energy demands, leaving readers to ponder the wider implications of GMO adoption.

Jones et al. (2020) expand on this line of inquiry in their exploration of energy consumption patterns in agricultural systems. Their research draws attention to the intersection of GMO utilization and fuel requirements, offering a thought-provoking analysis of the potential links between corn farming practices in Illinois and energy dynamics in distant locales such as Cuba. Their work lays the groundwork for uncovering the underlying mechanisms that tie together GMO-infused cornfields and fuel consumption patterns.

As we pivot towards popular literature, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, "Seeds of Deception" by Jeffrey M. Smith, and "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser provide insightful perspectives on agricultural practices and their environmental ramifications. While these books may not directly address the specific correlation between GMO use in corn and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba, they offer a broader lens through which to view the interconnectedness of food production, energy usage, and environmental impact.

In the realm of fiction, novels such as "The Corn Identity" (a gripping tale of an amnesiac corn scientist caught in a web of agricultural espionage), "GMO-ocalypse Now" (a dystopian thriller set in a world overrun by genetically modified corn), and "The Maize Runner" (a gripping dystopian saga where adolescents traverse treacherous corn mazes) provide imaginative narratives that, while fictional, underscore the public fascination with the intricacies of corn cultivation and its potential societal implications.

Furthermore, cinema has not been immune to the allure of agricultural themes. Films such as "Corn on the 4th of July" (a heartwarming tale of a farmer's journey to showcase his prized corn crop at a national festival), "Children of the Corn" (a chilling horror film set in a rural town plagued by sinister forces linked to corn cultivation), and "The Corn Ultimatum" (a riveting political drama surrounding a high-stakes negotiation over GMO corn trade agreements) offer diverse perspectives on the cultural significance and narrative potential of corn-related themes.

These seemingly disparate works serve as a reminder of the far-reaching impact of agricultural practices in shaping popular discourse, and while they may not directly address the specific correlation under investigation, they underscore the pervasive presence of corn-related motifs in contemporary media.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 2000 to 2021

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The intersection of agriculture and energy consumption has long been a fertile ground for research. In this paper, we delve into the often-cobbed world of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and their unlikely connection to fossil fuel consumption in Cuba. While this may sound like a kernel of an idea, our findings have unearthed a correlation that's more than just corny.
It's no secret that GMOs have been a hot potato in the realm of agriculture, sparking debates that can sometimes turn as heated as a popped corn kernel. Similarly, the topic of fossil fuel usage in Cuba may seem a world away from the cornfields of Illinois, but our research has uncovered a link that's as surprising as finding a corncob in a haystack.
Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team has cracked open the cob to reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient, which may leave some scratching their heads more than a cob of corn. But fear not, dear reader, as we aim to butter you up with compelling evidence and insights that will cornvince you of the meaningful connection we've unearthed.
As we embark on this journey through the cornfields of Illinois and the energy landscape of Cuba, we encourage you to lend us your ear and see for yourself the salky connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our research not only sheds light on the interplay between agricultural practices and energy consumption but also offers a-maize-ing food for thought in the world of scientific investigation.
So, grab your ear of corn and let's husk this mystery together, because when it comes to GMOs and fossil fuels, there's more than meets the husk!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unearth the tantalizing link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba, our research team employed a concoction of data analysis methods that would make even the most cautious statistician corn-fused. We collected data from the vast expanse of the internet, but predominantly relied on the agricultural treasure trove of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the energy-laden repositories of the Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Before diving into the statistical labyrinth, we meticulously combed through a cornucopia of literature, seeking insight into the impact of GMO usage in agriculture and the complex web of energy consumption patterns. Armed with this knowledge, we husked our way through the extensive datasets, carefully examining the yearly production of GMO corn in Illinois and the fossil fuel consumption in Cuba from 2000 to 2021.

Employing agricultural and energy data as rich as a field of ripe corn, our research team conducted a thorough examination of the statistical underpinnings. We wrangled with regression analyses and correlation coefficients, aiming to peel back the layers of complexity and reveal any hidden tassels of connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

In order to ensure the robustness of our findings, we employed rigorous statistical techniques, plowing through the data with as much precision as a corn planter in the heart of the Midwest. Our analysis was conducted with a kernel of skepticism, as we sought to separate the wheat from the chaff and present a compelling case for the correlation we have unearthed.

Despite the perplexing nature of our research question, we approached our methodology with the tenacity of a combine harvester in the golden fields of Illinois. While some may view the link between GMO corn and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba as a-maize-ing, our research aims to deliver a harvest of insights that will have our readers reaching for their ear of corn in awe.

With the vigor of a cornstalk reaching for the sun, our methodology was designed to plow through the layers of complexity and brew a stew of evidence that's as rich and nourishing as a ripe ear of corn. So, as we venture forth into the kernels of our research findings, we invite our readers to keep an open ear and savor the a-peeling blend of scientific analysis and lighthearted exploration.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9745268, r-squared of 0.9497024, 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]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Introduction
The intersection of agriculture and energy consumption has long been a fertile ground for research. In this paper, we delve into the often-cobbed world of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and their unlikely connection to fossil fuel consumption in Cuba. While this may sound like a kernel of an idea, our findings have unearthed a correlation that's more than just corny.
It's no secret that GMOs have been a hot potato in the realm of agriculture, sparking debates that can sometimes turn as heated as a popped corn kernel. Similarly, the topic of fossil fuel usage in Cuba may seem a world away from the cornfields of Illinois, but our research has uncovered a link that's as surprising as finding a corncob in a haystack.
Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team has cracked open the cob to reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient, which may leave some scratching their heads more than a cob of corn. But fear not, dear reader, as we aim to butter you up with compelling evidence and insights that will cornvince you of the meaningful connection we've unearthed.
As we embark on this journey through the cornfields of Illinois and the energy landscape of Cuba, we encourage you to lend us your ear and see for yourself the salky connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our research not only sheds light on the interplay between agricultural practices and energy consumption but also offers a-maize-ing food for thought in the world of scientific investigation.
So, grab your ear of corn and let's husk this mystery together, because when it comes to GMOs and fossil fuels, there's more than meets the husk!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis of the relationship between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba revealed a strikingly strong correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9745268 indicates a remarkably tight connection between these seemingly divergent agricultural and energy variables. It seems that the GMOs and fossil fuels have been in cahoots more closely than we anticipated, like two peas in a pod, or, in this case, two ears of corn in a husk.

Furthermore, the high r-squared value of 0.9497024 suggests that a whopping 94.97% of the variation in fossil fuel use in Cuba can be explained by the variability in GMO use in corn grown in Illinois. This finding is as clear as the kernels on an ear of corn – well, at least 94.97% clear.

In addition, the p-value of < 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, much like the significant impact of an unexpected corn maze on a farmer's weekend plans. This suggests that the correlation we've uncovered is not just a mere coincidence but rather a meaningful association between these two variables that has stalked the fields of agricultural and energy research for quite some time.

A scatterplot illustrating this robust correlation is presented in Figure 1, but for now, we'll leave you on tenterhooks, waiting to see this graph that graphically demonstrates the surprising connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba. If our findings don't cornvince you of the intriguing link between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, then we might have to re-corn-sider our approach!

So, as we digest the implications of our findings, let's husk away any doubts and savor the pop-corn-worthy discovery we've made. After all, in the world of scientific inquiry, truth is often stranger than friction (or perhaps cornier, in this case).


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The burgeoning evidence on the relationship between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba has attracted significant scholarly attention in recent years. Smith et al. (2018) conducted a comprehensive study examining the impact of GMO adoption on agricultural practices, while simultaneously considering its potential ripple effects on energy consumption. Their findings underscore the complex interplay between genetically modified corn and the broader environmental landscape, prompting further investigation into the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate phenomena.
In "The Corn Conundrum: Unraveling the Mysteries of GMOs and Energy" by Doe (2017), the author delves into the intricate web of corn genetics and its implications for energy utilization. The study illuminates the various dimensions of GMO cultivation, shedding light on how these practices may reverberate across different geographical regions. Doe's work serves as a poignant reminder of the tangled relationship between agricultural innovation and energy demands, leaving readers to ponder the wider implications of GMO adoption.

Jones et al. (2020) expand on this line of inquiry in their exploration of energy consumption patterns in agricultural systems. Their research draws attention to the intersection of GMO utilization and fuel requirements, offering a thought-provoking analysis of the potential links between corn farming practices in Illinois and energy dynamics in distant locales such as Cuba. Their work lays the groundwork for uncovering the underlying mechanisms that tie together GMO-infused cornfields and fuel consumption patterns.
As we pivot towards popular literature, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, "Seeds of Deception" by Jeffrey M. Smith, and "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser provide insightful perspectives on agricultural practices and their environmental ramifications. While these books may not directly address the specific correlation between GMO use in corn and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba, they offer a broader lens through which to view the interconnectedness of food production, energy usage, and environmental impact.
In the realm of fiction, novels such as "The Corn Identity" (a gripping tale of an amnesiac corn scientist caught in a web of agricultural espionage), "GMO-ocalypse Now" (a dystopian thriller set in a world overrun by genetically modified corn), and "The Maize Runner" (a gripping dystopian saga where adolescents traverse treacherous corn mazes) provide imaginative narratives that, while fictional, underscore the public fascination with the intricacies of corn cultivation and its potential societal implications.
Furthermore, cinema has not been immune to the allure of agricultural themes. Films such as "Corn on the 4th of July" (a heartwarming tale of a farmer's journey to showcase his prized corn crop at a national festival), "Children of the Corn" (a chilling horror film set in a rural town plagued by sinister forces linked to corn cultivation), and "The Corn Ultimatum" (a riveting political drama surrounding a high-stakes negotiation over GMO corn trade agreements) offer diverse perspectives on the cultural significance and narrative potential of corn-related themes.
These seemingly disparate works serve as a reminder of the far-reaching impact of agricultural practices in shaping popular discourse, and while they may not directly address the specific correlation under investigation, they underscore the pervasive presence of corn-related motifs in contemporary media.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the relationship between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba revealed a strikingly strong correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9745268 indicates a remarkably tight connection between these seemingly divergent agricultural and energy variables. It seems that the GMOs and fossil fuels have been in cahoots more closely than we anticipated, like two peas in a pod, or, in this case, two ears of corn in a husk.
Furthermore, the high r-squared value of 0.9497024 suggests that a whopping 94.97% of the variation in fossil fuel use in Cuba can be explained by the variability in GMO use in corn grown in Illinois. This finding is as clear as the kernels on an ear of corn – well, at least 94.97% clear.
In addition, the p-value of < 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, much like the significant impact of an unexpected corn maze on a farmer's weekend plans. This suggests that the correlation we've uncovered is not just a mere coincidence but rather a meaningful association between these two variables that has stalked the fields of agricultural and energy research for quite some time.
A scatterplot illustrating this robust correlation is presented in Figure 1, but for now, we'll leave you on tenterhooks, waiting to see this graph that graphically demonstrates the surprising connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba. If our findings don't cornvince you of the intriguing link between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, then we might have to re-corn-sider our approach!
So, as we digest the implications of our findings, let's husk away any doubts and savor the pop-corn-worthy discovery we've made. After all, in the world of scientific inquiry, truth is often stranger than friction (or perhaps cornier, in this case).

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our research have elicited a-maize-ing revelations that would have ears perk up across the scientific community. Our findings not only echo but amplify the earlier scholarly inquiries into the interplay between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba. The impressively high correlation coefficient aligns with the work of Smith et al. (2018) and Doe (2017), demonstrating a robust statistical relationship that is as substantial as a corn silo.

As we shuck the layers of this discovery, we find kernels of truth that harmonize with the previous literature. Jones et al. (2020) set the stage for understanding the intertwined relationship between agricultural practices and energy demands, and our investigation has provided tangible data reinforcing the intricate dance between GMO-infused cornfields and fuel consumption patterns. The statistically significant correlation coefficient lends empirical weight to these prior scholarly conjectures, proving that this is not just another case of cornspiracy theories.

Furthermore, as we reflect on the broader contexts illuminated in popular literature, the gripping saga of "The Maize Runner" finds an unexpected nod of validation in our research. While the novel may be a work of fiction, our findings corroborate the public's fascination with the complexities of corn cultivation and its potential impact on society. Like the protagonists navigating treacherous corn mazes, we have traversed the convoluted pathways of agricultural and energy data to reveal an unexpected connection that is no mere fiction but an empirical reality.

The unexpected twists and turns of our investigation have yielded results that are as surprising as a corn kernel popping in a hot pan. Our robust correlation coefficient, high r-squared value, and statistically significant p-value speak volumes about the depth of the relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This is not just a cornvenient coincidence; it's a noteworthy correlation that has stalked the agricultural and energy realms, waiting to be unearthed and examined.

The remarkable strength of the correlation between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba urges us to pop the cork on preconceived notions and embrace this unexpected partnership between agriculture and energy consumption. Our results implore researchers to reap what they sow, as the maize of scientific inquiry continues to yield surprising connections. The implications of our findings stretch as far and wide as a cornfield at harvest time, and we are eager to see how future research cultivates and grows from this fertile ground.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and Fossil fuel use in Cuba. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
"Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.

Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.

We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
The intersection of agriculture and energy consumption has long been a fertile ground for research. In this paper, we delve into the often-cobbed world of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and their unlikely connection to fossil fuel consumption in Cuba. While this may sound like a kernel of an idea, our findings have unearthed a correlation that's more than just corny.
It's no secret that GMOs have been a hot potato in the realm of agriculture, sparking debates that can sometimes turn as heated as a popped corn kernel. Similarly, the topic of fossil fuel usage in Cuba may seem a world away from the cornfields of Illinois, but our research has uncovered a link that's as surprising as finding a corncob in a haystack.
Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team has cracked open the cob to reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient, which may leave some scratching their heads more than a cob of corn. But fear not, dear reader, as we aim to butter you up with compelling evidence and insights that will cornvince you of the meaningful connection we've unearthed.
As we embark on this journey through the cornfields of Illinois and the energy landscape of Cuba, we encourage you to lend us your ear and see for yourself the salky connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our research not only sheds light on the interplay between agricultural practices and energy consumption but also offers a-maize-ing food for thought in the world of scientific investigation.
So, grab your ear of corn and let's husk this mystery together, because when it comes to GMOs and fossil fuels, there's more than meets the husk!

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the relationship between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba revealed a strikingly strong correlation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9745268 indicates a remarkably tight connection between these seemingly divergent agricultural and energy variables. It seems that the GMOs and fossil fuels have been in cahoots more closely than we anticipated, like two peas in a pod, or, in this case, two ears of corn in a husk.
Furthermore, the high r-squared value of 0.9497024 suggests that a whopping 94.97% of the variation in fossil fuel use in Cuba can be explained by the variability in GMO use in corn grown in Illinois. This finding is as clear as the kernels on an ear of corn – well, at least 94.97% clear.
In addition, the p-value of < 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, much like the significant impact of an unexpected corn maze on a farmer's weekend plans. This suggests that the correlation we've uncovered is not just a mere coincidence but rather a meaningful association between these two variables that has stalked the fields of agricultural and energy research for quite some time.
A scatterplot illustrating this robust correlation is presented in Figure 1, but for now, we'll leave you on tenterhooks, waiting to see this graph that graphically demonstrates the surprising connection between GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel use in Cuba. If our findings don't cornvince you of the intriguing link between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, then we might have to re-corn-sider our approach!
So, as we digest the implications of our findings, let's husk away any doubts and savor the pop-corn-worthy discovery we've made. After all, in the world of scientific inquiry, truth is often stranger than friction (or perhaps cornier, in this case).

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has shucked the notion that GMO use in corn grown in Illinois and fossil fuel consumption in Cuba are as separate as kernels on an ear of corn. The robust correlation we've uncovered is as surprising as finding a popcorn kernel in your teeth after the movie – it's there, whether you expected it or not!

The statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268 has popped the lid off this cornucopia of unexpected connections, leaving us to wonder if there's more than just corn syrup in this tangled web of agricultural and energy dynamics. And with an r-squared value of 0.9497024, it seems that nearly 95% of the variability in fossil fuel use in Cuba can be traced back to the twists and turns of GMO use in Illinois, making this relationship as tight as a corn husk in August.

Our findings, much like a hot buttered ear of corn, offer a delectable morsel of insight into the complex interactions between agricultural practices and energy consumption. So, as we bid adieu to this corny connection, we do so with the ripe conviction that further research in this area is about as necessary as a cornfield is in a desert – in other words, not at all!



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 Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agricultural Anecdotes


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 Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agricultural Entanglements and Biofuel Barter


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 Stalk Talk: Unearthing the Corny Connection Between GMOs in Illinois and Fossil Fuel Fun in Cuba with an abstract of Our research aimed to peel back the layers of the cornfield and dig deep into the enigmatic link between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Illinois and the consumption of fossil fuels in Cuba. While at first glance, these two topics may seem as mismatched as mismatched socks, our findings unveil a startling correlation that could barley be believed.
Analyzing data from the USDA and Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9745268, with p < 0.01, for the period from 2000 to 2021. This robust correlation suggests that there may be more than meets the eye in the tangled web of agriculture and energy consumption.
We invite our readers to join us in this journey through the maize of scientific inquiry, as we husk the truth from the cornstalks, delve into the kernel of the matter, and shed light on the ear-resistible connection between GMO-corn and fossil fuel use. This research presents a unique opportunity to understand the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and environmental impact, while also providing some kernel of amusement in the world of scientific investigation.

ChatGPT:

GMOs, corn, Illinois, fossil fuel, Cuba, agriculture, energy consumption, correlation, USDA data, Energy Information Administration, environmental impact, scientific inquiry, agricultural practices

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Fossil fuel use in Cuba
Detailed data title: Total fossil fuel use in Cuba in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Fossil fuel use in Cuba

Correlation r = 0.9745268 (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 = 0.9497024 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 95% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Fossil fuel use in Cuba) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in corn grown in Illinois) over the 22 years from 2000 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.9E-14. 0.0000000000000186912681922609
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 0.97 in 1.9E-12% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 53,500,917,632,440 random variables You don't actually need 53 trillion 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 21 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 21 because we have two variables measured over a period of 22 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.

[ 0.94, 0.99 ] 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.
2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
GMO use in corn grown in Illinois (GMO corn %)11112519405259525553788388878589888886
Fossil fuel use in Cuba (Billion kWh)13.159113.436413.774814.064313.871613.962815.010916.061815.958416.015715.82316.155816.679417.208617.472718.317818.469118.585718.874318.620517.679418.8109




Why this works

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




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([1,1,1,1,2,5,19,40,52,59,52,55,53,78,83,88,87,85,89,88,88,86,])
array_2 = np.array([13.1591,13.4364,13.7748,14.0643,13.8716,13.9628,15.0109,16.0618,15.9584,16.0157,15.823,16.1558,16.6794,17.2086,17.4727,18.3178,18.4691,18.5857,18.8743,18.6205,17.6794,18.8109,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in corn grown in Illinois"
array_2_name = "Fossil fuel use in Cuba"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your correlation rating is out of this world!


Correlation ID: 2597 · Black Variable ID: 739 · Red Variable ID: 23615
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0