about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,234 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton in Georgia and the second variable is Arson in Georgia.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The lack of GMOs meant the cotton wasn't fire-resistant, so arsonists had to find a new, less flame-retardant target. Cotton fields just weren't sparking their interest like before!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars', depicting a Georgia cotton field with genetically modified cotton plants standing tall and healthy under a sunny sky. Nearby, a group of disgruntled insects sets a small fire amid the rows of cotton, causing a smoky commotion. The scene evokes a sense of conflict and rebellion within a setting reminiscent of the epic space saga. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. 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: Cute cartoon Whimsical illustration Whimsical illustration a Polaroid photo An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia, in the following situation: Because the introduction of genetically modified cotton in Georgia led to a reduction in pesticide use, the local insect population felt so underappreciated that they set fire to cotton fields in protest. They were just trying to make a point about their vital role in the ecosystem, but it really backfired!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a Georgia cotton field, genetically modified cotton plants stand tall and healthy, their leaves untouched by pests. But nearby, a group of disgruntled insects sets a small fire amid the rows of cotton, their tiny protest causing a smoky commotion in the sunny field.

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 'Star Wars' ] and depicting this scene: In a Georgia cotton field, genetically modified cotton plants stand tall and healthy, their leaves untouched by pests. But nearby, a group of disgruntled insects sets a small fire amid the rows of cotton, their tiny protest causing a smoky commotion in the sunny field. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars', depicting a Georgia cotton field with genetically modified cotton plants standing tall and healthy under a sunny sky. Nearby, a group of disgruntled insects sets a small fire amid the rows of cotton, causing a smoky commotion. The scene evokes a sense of conflict and rebellion within a setting reminiscent of the epic space saga.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

The Journal of Agricultural Arson Studies

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 witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7871426 and p < 0.01 for 2000 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]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Cotton, the fluffy white gold of the South, has long played a pivotal role in Georgia's agricultural landscape. However, beneath its seemingly innocuous appearance, a flammable relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state has sparked our curiosity. This unexpected connection has left us wondering: could GMO cotton truly be igniting criminal behavior in the Peach State?

They say that in Georgia, the fields are always in a state of "blazing glory," but we never thought that phrase would take on a more literal interpretation. This research aims to delve into the fiery intersection of agricultural innovation and criminal activity in hopes of uncovering the smoldering truth behind this unexpected correlation.

As we embark on this combustible investigation, our statistical analysis has kindled some eyebrow-raising findings. The correlation coefficient of 0.7871426 between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01, has set our research ablaze with excitement over the prospect of a significant association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena.

It seems that genetically modified cotton may have a "burning desire" to attract arson, prompting us to explore the underlying mechanisms at play. We yearn to unravel the enigmatic web of factors that could be stoking the flames of criminal behavior in Georgia's cotton fields.

With these findings igniting our curiosity, we cautiously approach the discussion of potential causality, keeping in mind the wise words of Benjamin Franklin – "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead, but it takes a statistical analysis to reveal the potential causal relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia."

The pun-derful relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia certainly raises some fiery questions that beg for further exploration. As we proceed, we must resist the temptation to jump to hasty conclusions and instead fuel the flames of inquiry, shedding light on the unanticipated consequences of agricultural advancements and their unexpected combustion with criminal activities.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Cotton, the fluffy white gold of the South, has long played a pivotal role in Georgia's agricultural landscape. However, beneath its seemingly innocuous appearance, a flammable relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state has sparked our curiosity. This unexpected connection has left us wondering: could GMO cotton truly be igniting criminal behavior in the Peach State?
They say that in Georgia, the fields are always in a state of "blazing glory," but we never thought that phrase would take on a more literal interpretation. This research aims to delve into the fiery intersection of agricultural innovation and criminal activity in hopes of uncovering the smoldering truth behind this unexpected correlation.
As we embark on this combustible investigation, our statistical analysis has kindled some eyebrow-raising findings. The correlation coefficient of 0.7871426 between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01, has set our research ablaze with excitement over the prospect of a significant association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena.
It seems that genetically modified cotton may have a "burning desire" to attract arson, prompting us to explore the underlying mechanisms at play. We yearn to unravel the enigmatic web of factors that could be stoking the flames of criminal behavior in Georgia's cotton fields.
With these findings igniting our curiosity, we cautiously approach the discussion of potential causality, keeping in mind the wise words of Benjamin Franklin – "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead, but it takes a statistical analysis to reveal the potential causal relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia."
The pun-derful relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia certainly raises some fiery questions that beg for further exploration. As we proceed, we must resist the temptation to jump to hasty conclusions and instead fuel the flames of inquiry, shedding light on the unanticipated consequences of agricultural advancements and their unexpected combustion with criminal activities.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The literature examining the relationship between genetically modified organism (GMO) use in cotton and arson in the state of Georgia is surprisingly scarce, much like a cotton field after harvest season. However, the handful of studies available provide some insight into this incendiary phenomenon.

In "Fields of Fire: The Intersection of Agriculture and Arson" by Smith et al., the authors find that the adoption of GMO cotton in Georgia is positively associated with an increase in arson incidents, sparking a heated discussion within the agricultural and criminology communities. This finding ignites further interest in understanding the underlying mechanisms that may fuel this unexpected correlation.

Adding fuel to the fire, Doe and Jones, in their study "Burning Questions: Exploring the Origins of Arson in Agricultural Settings," delve into the potential link between agricultural practices, including the use of GMOs, and arson in rural areas. The authors heat up the conversation by emphasizing the need for comprehensive research to uncover the smoldering truth behind this seemingly improbable connection.

It seems that the relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia is no mere flash in the pan; rather, it smolders with potential implications that reach far beyond the state's borders. As we seek to extinguish the flames of uncertainty, our investigation draws inspiration from an eclectic mix of sources, ranging from non-fictional works such as "The Great Georgia Arson Mystery" by John L. Chapman and "Cotton: A Flammable History" by Stephen Yafa, to fictional accounts like "Arson in Georgia: A Suspense Thriller" by Emma Blaze and "Fields of Fury: The Firestarter Chronicles" by Luke Kindle.

In a similar vein, board games such as "Flash Point: Fire Rescue" and "Agricola" offer intriguing parallels to our research, reminding us that the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and criminal activities may be more akin to a game of strategy than a mere roll of the dice. As we navigate this combustible terrain, we are reminded of the timeless wisdom of Sir Francis Bacon, who famously remarked, "Hope is a good breakfast, but a bad supper." In the context of our research, perhaps we should heed the cautionary advice that statistical correlations, much like fiery breakfasts, should be approached with a healthy dose of skepticism.

As we turn up the heat on our investigation, let us embrace this conflagration of curiosity and kindle the flames of knowledge, for it is through the relentless pursuit of understanding that we will ultimately extinguish the burning questions surrounding the intersection of GMO use in cotton and arson in Georgia.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services . You used data from 2000 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]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Cotton, the fluffy white gold of the South, has long played a pivotal role in Georgia's agricultural landscape. However, beneath its seemingly innocuous appearance, a flammable relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state has sparked our curiosity. This unexpected connection has left us wondering: could GMO cotton truly be igniting criminal behavior in the Peach State?
They say that in Georgia, the fields are always in a state of "blazing glory," but we never thought that phrase would take on a more literal interpretation. This research aims to delve into the fiery intersection of agricultural innovation and criminal activity in hopes of uncovering the smoldering truth behind this unexpected correlation.
As we embark on this combustible investigation, our statistical analysis has kindled some eyebrow-raising findings. The correlation coefficient of 0.7871426 between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01, has set our research ablaze with excitement over the prospect of a significant association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena.
It seems that genetically modified cotton may have a "burning desire" to attract arson, prompting us to explore the underlying mechanisms at play. We yearn to unravel the enigmatic web of factors that could be stoking the flames of criminal behavior in Georgia's cotton fields.
With these findings igniting our curiosity, we cautiously approach the discussion of potential causality, keeping in mind the wise words of Benjamin Franklin – "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead, but it takes a statistical analysis to reveal the potential causal relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia."
The pun-derful relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia certainly raises some fiery questions that beg for further exploration. As we proceed, we must resist the temptation to jump to hasty conclusions and instead fuel the flames of inquiry, shedding light on the unanticipated consequences of agricultural advancements and their unexpected combustion with criminal activities.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the sizzling connection between GMO cotton use and arson incidents in Georgia, our research team embarked on a data-fueled journey that involved both quantitative and qualitative analyses. The approach we adopted could be likened to navigating a maze of fiery data, where we endeavored to untangle the smoky relationship between agricultural innovation and criminal activity.

Firstly, we gathered comprehensive data on the adoption of GMO cotton in Georgia from 2000 to 2022. Our primary source of information was the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), where we sifted through a plethora of data points like treasure hunters seeking the golden glow of statistical insight in the vast cotton fields of information. This data was our kindling, providing the spark for our investigation into the potential link between GMO cotton and arson.

To further stoke the flames of our inquiry, we acquired data on arson incidents in Georgia from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services. This data served as our fuel, igniting the flames of statistical analysis as we sought to uncover any fiery patterns that could potentially illuminate the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson in the state. We religiously combed through the data, treating it like a treasure trove of information that could help us piece together the puzzle of this unexpected relationship.

Having gathered the data, we then engaged in a rigorous statistical analysis, akin to tending a fire to ensure a steady, controlled burn of information. We applied sophisticated correlation and regression analyses to quantify the strength and direction of the relationship between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents. Our statistical methods were as precise as a fire dancer's movements, ensuring that we explored every twist and turn of the data with a keen eye for potential flare-ups of significance.

To complement our quantitative analysis, we also conducted qualitative interviews with agricultural experts and law enforcement professionals to glean insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the observed correlation. These interviews served as the kindling of context, providing a rich tapestry of perspectives that added depth to our understanding of this incendiary relationship.

In the spirit of full transparency, we note the limitations of our methodology. While we endeavored to gather and analyze data with the utmost care, the nature of observational research means that we cannot definitively establish causality. Therefore, we approach our findings with the caution of firefighters navigating a smoky landscape, understanding that correlation does not necessarily imply causation.

Despite these limitations, our methodology was designed to illuminate the fiery connection between GMO cotton use and arson incidents in Georgia, fanning the flames of inquiry and shedding light on this unexpected intersection of agriculture and crime.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7871426, r-squared of 0.6195934, 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]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Cotton, the fluffy white gold of the South, has long played a pivotal role in Georgia's agricultural landscape. However, beneath its seemingly innocuous appearance, a flammable relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state has sparked our curiosity. This unexpected connection has left us wondering: could GMO cotton truly be igniting criminal behavior in the Peach State?
They say that in Georgia, the fields are always in a state of "blazing glory," but we never thought that phrase would take on a more literal interpretation. This research aims to delve into the fiery intersection of agricultural innovation and criminal activity in hopes of uncovering the smoldering truth behind this unexpected correlation.
As we embark on this combustible investigation, our statistical analysis has kindled some eyebrow-raising findings. The correlation coefficient of 0.7871426 between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01, has set our research ablaze with excitement over the prospect of a significant association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena.
It seems that genetically modified cotton may have a "burning desire" to attract arson, prompting us to explore the underlying mechanisms at play. We yearn to unravel the enigmatic web of factors that could be stoking the flames of criminal behavior in Georgia's cotton fields.
With these findings igniting our curiosity, we cautiously approach the discussion of potential causality, keeping in mind the wise words of Benjamin Franklin – "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead, but it takes a statistical analysis to reveal the potential causal relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia."
The pun-derful relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia certainly raises some fiery questions that beg for further exploration. As we proceed, we must resist the temptation to jump to hasty conclusions and instead fuel the flames of inquiry, shedding light on the unanticipated consequences of agricultural advancements and their unexpected combustion with criminal activities.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our scorching investigation into the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents in Georgia has yielded some flame-tastic findings. From the years 2000 to 2022, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, an r-squared of 0.6195934, and a p-value of less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the use of GMO cotton and the occurrence of arson in the Peach State.

Fig. 1 displays a scorching scatterplot showcasing the strong correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, leaving no doubt that this relationship is hotter than a fire in a cotton field.

This significant statistical link may be fireishing, but we must exercise caution in hastily attributing causality. As the saying goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire," and our research has certainly sparked further interest in delving deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unexpected connection.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The literature examining the relationship between genetically modified organism (GMO) use in cotton and arson in the state of Georgia is surprisingly scarce, much like a cotton field after harvest season. However, the handful of studies available provide some insight into this incendiary phenomenon.
In "Fields of Fire: The Intersection of Agriculture and Arson" by Smith et al., the authors find that the adoption of GMO cotton in Georgia is positively associated with an increase in arson incidents, sparking a heated discussion within the agricultural and criminology communities. This finding ignites further interest in understanding the underlying mechanisms that may fuel this unexpected correlation.
Adding fuel to the fire, Doe and Jones, in their study "Burning Questions: Exploring the Origins of Arson in Agricultural Settings," delve into the potential link between agricultural practices, including the use of GMOs, and arson in rural areas. The authors heat up the conversation by emphasizing the need for comprehensive research to uncover the smoldering truth behind this seemingly improbable connection.
It seems that the relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia is no mere flash in the pan; rather, it smolders with potential implications that reach far beyond the state's borders. As we seek to extinguish the flames of uncertainty, our investigation draws inspiration from an eclectic mix of sources, ranging from non-fictional works such as "The Great Georgia Arson Mystery" by John L. Chapman and "Cotton: A Flammable History" by Stephen Yafa, to fictional accounts like "Arson in Georgia: A Suspense Thriller" by Emma Blaze and "Fields of Fury: The Firestarter Chronicles" by Luke Kindle.
In a similar vein, board games such as "Flash Point: Fire Rescue" and "Agricola" offer intriguing parallels to our research, reminding us that the intricate interplay between agricultural practices and criminal activities may be more akin to a game of strategy than a mere roll of the dice. As we navigate this combustible terrain, we are reminded of the timeless wisdom of Sir Francis Bacon, who famously remarked, "Hope is a good breakfast, but a bad supper." In the context of our research, perhaps we should heed the cautionary advice that statistical correlations, much like fiery breakfasts, should be approached with a healthy dose of skepticism.
As we turn up the heat on our investigation, let us embrace this conflagration of curiosity and kindle the flames of knowledge, for it is through the relentless pursuit of understanding that we will ultimately extinguish the burning questions surrounding the intersection of GMO use in cotton and arson in Georgia.

[[RESULTS]]
Our scorching investigation into the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents in Georgia has yielded some flame-tastic findings. From the years 2000 to 2022, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, an r-squared of 0.6195934, and a p-value of less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the use of GMO cotton and the occurrence of arson in the Peach State.
Fig. 1 displays a scorching scatterplot showcasing the strong correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, leaving no doubt that this relationship is hotter than a fire in a cotton field.
This significant statistical link may be fireishing, but we must exercise caution in hastily attributing causality. As the saying goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire," and our research has certainly sparked further interest in delving deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unexpected connection.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation into the connection between GMO cotton adoption and arson in Georgia yielded some truly lit results, confirming the fiery relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. The scorching correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01, provides compelling evidence that the adoption of GMO cotton is associated with increased arson incidents in the state. This correlation is hotter than a summer day in Georgia, and it supports the previous findings by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones, fanning the flames of curiosity around this incendiary topic.

The presence of a strong statistical association, akin to the sizzle of a barbecue, underscores the need for further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this unexpected link. While we should resist the temptation to jump to conclusions like a firefighter descending a pole, these findings align with the call of previous researchers to unravel the smoldering truth behind the relationship between agricultural practices and arson in rural areas.

Our results amplify the urgency of understanding the potential implications of GMO cotton adoption on arson incidents in Georgia. This unexpected connection serves as a wake-up call for agricultural and criminological communities to stoke the flames of inquiry, as it suggests that agricultural advancements may have unanticipated consequences, much like a bonfire getting out of control. It's clear that the fiery nature of GMO cotton in Georgia is not just a flash in the pan, but rather a burning issue that demands further attention and investigation.

As we keep the fire of research burning, it's important to approach these statistical correlations like a dad joke—appreciating the pun, but not taking it as gospel truth. While our findings provide a scorching insight into the interplay between GMO use in cotton and arson in Georgia, identifying causality remains an ember of uncertainty that requires careful attention.

In summary, our findings stoke the flames of curiosity and emphasize the need for continued exploration into the unexpected and fiery consequences of agricultural advancements. This research not only ignites further interest in the surprising connections between agriculture and crime but also provides a spark for future studies to shed light on this flammable relationship.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and Arson in Georgia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.

The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Cotton, the fluffy white gold of the South, has long played a pivotal role in Georgia's agricultural landscape. However, beneath its seemingly innocuous appearance, a flammable relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state has sparked our curiosity. This unexpected connection has left us wondering: could GMO cotton truly be igniting criminal behavior in the Peach State?
They say that in Georgia, the fields are always in a state of "blazing glory," but we never thought that phrase would take on a more literal interpretation. This research aims to delve into the fiery intersection of agricultural innovation and criminal activity in hopes of uncovering the smoldering truth behind this unexpected correlation.
As we embark on this combustible investigation, our statistical analysis has kindled some eyebrow-raising findings. The correlation coefficient of 0.7871426 between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01, has set our research ablaze with excitement over the prospect of a significant association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena.
It seems that genetically modified cotton may have a "burning desire" to attract arson, prompting us to explore the underlying mechanisms at play. We yearn to unravel the enigmatic web of factors that could be stoking the flames of criminal behavior in Georgia's cotton fields.
With these findings igniting our curiosity, we cautiously approach the discussion of potential causality, keeping in mind the wise words of Benjamin Franklin – "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead, but it takes a statistical analysis to reveal the potential causal relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia."
The pun-derful relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia certainly raises some fiery questions that beg for further exploration. As we proceed, we must resist the temptation to jump to hasty conclusions and instead fuel the flames of inquiry, shedding light on the unanticipated consequences of agricultural advancements and their unexpected combustion with criminal activities.

[[RESULTS]]
Our scorching investigation into the correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents in Georgia has yielded some flame-tastic findings. From the years 2000 to 2022, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, an r-squared of 0.6195934, and a p-value of less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the use of GMO cotton and the occurrence of arson in the Peach State.
Fig. 1 displays a scorching scatterplot showcasing the strong correlation between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents, leaving no doubt that this relationship is hotter than a fire in a cotton field.
This significant statistical link may be fireishing, but we must exercise caution in hastily attributing causality. As the saying goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire," and our research has certainly sparked further interest in delving deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unexpected connection.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has illuminated a hot topic in the agricultural and criminal spheres - the fiery connection between GMO cotton adoption and arson incidents in Georgia. The statistical link we uncovered has certainly set our investigation ablaze with excitement and raised burning questions about the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

As we sifted through the data, we couldn't help but be reminded of that classic dad joke: "What did one flame say to the other on Valentine's Day? You really ignite my passion!" Similarly, the correlation between GMO cotton and arson incidents in Georgia has sparked a passion for understanding the underlying mechanisms at play.

While our findings may be fireishing, caution is needed before jumping to conclusions. Just like a well-crafted pun, causality should not be hastily inferred. However, the potential implications of our research are certainly nothing to brush off - they have kindled further interest in exploring the unanticipated consequences of agricultural innovation.

In the spirit of good humor, we must acknowledge the wisdom of Mark Twain, who once remarked, "The reports of the demise of the statistical relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia have been greatly exaggerated." Indeed, our study has uncovered an unexpected and statistically significant association that warrants attention and further exploration.

In the spirit of a good dad joke at the end of a research paper, we assert that no more research is needed in this area. With our findings in hand, it's safe to say that the fire of inquiry has been well and truly stoked, leaving no embers of doubt about the smoldering relationship between GMO cotton and arson in Georgia.


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 Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agricultural Arson Studies


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 Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agricultural Arson Studies


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 Setting Cotton Fields Ablaze: The Flammable Relationship Between GMO Use and Arson in Georgia with an abstract of In this paper, we investigate the fiery connection between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton in Georgia and the occurrence of arson incidents in the state. Utilizing data from the USDA on GMO cotton adoption and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services on arson incidents, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the potential relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.
Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.7871426, with a p-value of less than 0.01 from the years 2000 to 2022, indicating a significant association between the use of GMO cotton and the incidence of arson in Georgia. This statistical link prompts us to exercise caution in attributing causality, but the evidence ignites further exploration into the underlying mechanisms at play.
The pun-derful relationship between genetically modified cotton and arson in Georgia offers a smoldering insight into the intersections of agriculture and crime. While we should not jump to hasty conclusions, the potential implications of these findings are certainly nothing to brush off. Our study sheds light on the unanticipated fire-starting potential of GMO cotton and highlights the need for continued research into the unexpected consequences of agricultural advancements.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, arson incidents, Georgia, statistical analysis, USDA data, FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, correlation coefficient, causality, agricultural advancements, unexpected consequences

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Arson in Georgia
Detailed data title: The arson rate per 100,000 residents in Georgia
Source: FBI Criminal Justice Information Services
See what else correlates with Arson in Georgia

Correlation r = 0.7871426 (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 = 0.6195934 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 62% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Arson in Georgia) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Georgia) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 8.3E-6. 0.0000083416507405584380000000
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 0.79 in 0.00083% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 119,880 random variables You don't actually need 119 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 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.

[ 0.56, 0.91 ] 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.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
GMO use in cotton in Georgia (GMO cotton %)18138141329191719202018135311411326
Arson in Georgia (Arson rate)15.315.416.415.214.3161516.616.813.812.312.612.511.210.58.610.58.97.66.16.46.96.6




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([18,13,8,14,13,29,19,17,19,20,20,18,13,5,3,1,1,4,1,1,3,2,6,])
array_2 = np.array([15.3,15.4,16.4,15.2,14.3,16,15,16.6,16.8,13.8,12.3,12.6,12.5,11.2,10.5,8.6,10.5,8.9,7.6,6.1,6.4,6.9,6.6,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in Georgia"
array_2_name = "Arson in Georgia"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating skills are legendary!


Correlation ID: 3234 · Black Variable ID: 770 · Red Variable ID: 20081
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0