about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,245 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and the second variable is GMO use in cotton in Arkansas.  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 cleaner air in Harrison led to an unexpected side effect - it boosted the morale of a nearby group of rebellious, eco-conscious cotton plants. Feeling invigorated by the fresh atmosphere, they collectively decided to ditch the genetically modified lifestyle and embrace their organic roots. It turns out, clean air isn't just a breath of fresh oxygen for us; it's also a catalyst for cotton rebellion against GMOs.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, depicting a hazy sky in Harrison, Arkansas. In the foreground, organic cotton plants sway gently in the wind, appearing vibrant and lively. Meanwhile, genetically modified cotton plants, with exaggerated "choked" expressions, seem to struggle against the haze. As the wind clears the air, the organic cotton plants visibly "breathe" easier, while the GMO cotton plants "branch" out and seem to spread rapidly, creating a whimsical "growing" problem for Arkansas. 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: Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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 2D animation Glitch art An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Charcoal a funny image macro
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas, in the following situation: As the air cleared, it became easier for organic cotton to "breathe." The GMO cotton, feeling choked out, decided to "branch" out to other states. It was a "growing" problem for Arkansas!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Harrison, Arkansas, the sky was hazy with air pollution, and the cotton fields were filled with genetically modified organisms (GMO) cotton plants. As the wind cleared the air, the organic cotton plants seemed to "breathe" easier, while the GMO cotton plants looked like they were getting choked out. In response, the GMO cotton plants began to "branch" out and spread to neighboring states, creating a "growing" problem for Arkansas.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: In Harrison, Arkansas, the sky was hazy with air pollution, and the cotton fields were filled with genetically modified organisms (GMO) cotton plants. As the wind cleared the air, the organic cotton plants seemed to "breathe" easier, while the GMO cotton plants looked like they were getting choked out. In response, the GMO cotton plants began to "branch" out and spread to neighboring states, creating a "growing" problem for Arkansas. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, depicting a hazy sky in Harrison, Arkansas. In the foreground, organic cotton plants sway gently in the wind, appearing vibrant and lively. Meanwhile, genetically modified cotton plants, with exaggerated "choked" expressions, seem to struggle against the haze. As the wind clears the air, the organic cotton plants visibly "breathe" easier, while the GMO cotton plants "branch" out and seem to spread rapidly, creating a whimsical "growing" problem for Arkansas.

*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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas caused GMO use in cotton in Arkansas to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas

The Journal of Environmental Genetics and Air Quality

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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and USDA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008 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]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.


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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As the saying goes, "Inhale the good stuff, exhale the bad stuff," but what if the bad stuff lingers in the air longer than a knock-knock joke? That's the predicament facing Harrison, Arkansas, where the presence of air pollutants has stirred up more questions than a curious cat at a science fair. The link between these pollutants and GMO cotton use in the area has left many scratching their heads, wondering if there's something more than just "lint" in the air.

The partnership between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and agriculture has been a hot topic in recent years, akin to a spicy jalapeño pepper in a bowl of mild salsa. And when it comes to cotton cultivation in Arkansas, the debate has expanded faster than a batch of yeast in a warm dough. This paper aims to peel back the layers of this complex relationship and see if there's more than just a "thread" connecting GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison.

In the quest to unravel this knotty problem, we've turned to data that's been more meticulously organized than a neat-freak's sock drawer. With statistical techniques sharper than a farmer's plow, we've dug into the numbers to uncover patterns that are more intriguing than a hidden treasure on a pirate ship. Our analysis produced results that were more significant than finding a relevant corny pun at a GMO conference – with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a stronger connection than spaghetti to a meatball.

The presence of air pollutants floating around Harrison has raised more eyebrows than a surprise party at a unibrow convention. And when we consider the simultaneous rise in GMO cotton use, we can't help but wonder if the correlation is more than just a "fluffy" coincidence. It's almost as if the air is whispering, "Cotton, I am your pollutant" in a Darth Vader voice.

In shedding light on this intricate web of cotton, pollutants, and environmental impact, we hope to cultivate a greater understanding of the implications that reach higher than a beanstalk in a fairy tale. Perhaps this study will open the door to exploring unrecognized relationships in agricultural practices, putting the "fun" in fungicide and the "laughter" in agriculture.


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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the saying goes, "Inhale the good stuff, exhale the bad stuff," but what if the bad stuff lingers in the air longer than a knock-knock joke? That's the predicament facing Harrison, Arkansas, where the presence of air pollutants has stirred up more questions than a curious cat at a science fair. The link between these pollutants and GMO cotton use in the area has left many scratching their heads, wondering if there's something more than just "lint" in the air.
The partnership between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and agriculture has been a hot topic in recent years, akin to a spicy jalapeño pepper in a bowl of mild salsa. And when it comes to cotton cultivation in Arkansas, the debate has expanded faster than a batch of yeast in a warm dough. This paper aims to peel back the layers of this complex relationship and see if there's more than just a "thread" connecting GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison.
In the quest to unravel this knotty problem, we've turned to data that's been more meticulously organized than a neat-freak's sock drawer. With statistical techniques sharper than a farmer's plow, we've dug into the numbers to uncover patterns that are more intriguing than a hidden treasure on a pirate ship. Our analysis produced results that were more significant than finding a relevant corny pun at a GMO conference – with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a stronger connection than spaghetti to a meatball.
The presence of air pollutants floating around Harrison has raised more eyebrows than a surprise party at a unibrow convention. And when we consider the simultaneous rise in GMO cotton use, we can't help but wonder if the correlation is more than just a "fluffy" coincidence. It's almost as if the air is whispering, "Cotton, I am your pollutant" in a Darth Vader voice.
In shedding light on this intricate web of cotton, pollutants, and environmental impact, we hope to cultivate a greater understanding of the implications that reach higher than a beanstalk in a fairy tale. Perhaps this study will open the door to exploring unrecognized relationships in agricultural practices, putting the "fun" in fungicide and the "laughter" in agriculture.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Previous research has delved into the connection between air pollution and agricultural practices in various regions, aiming to untangle the web of environmental factors at play. Smith et al. (2015) emphasized the impact of agricultural activities on air quality, highlighting the need for comprehensive studies to understand the implications of these interactions. Similarly, Doe (2018) examined the influence of genetically modified organism (GMO) use on environmental factors, shedding light on the potential consequences of GMO cultivation on air quality. Jones (2019) further expanded on this topic, drawing attention to the complex relationship between agricultural practices and air pollution.

Now, let's shift gears and take a walk on the lighter side of literature. In "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, the author delves into the intricacies of modern agriculture and its environmental impact, offering a thought-provoking exploration of our food production systems. On the more whimsical side, "The Secret Life of Bees" by Sue Monk Kidd paints a vivid picture of life on a beekeeping farm, reminding us of the interconnectedness of nature and human activity.

In the land of fiction, "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck captures the struggles of farmers during the Dust Bowl era, providing a poignant glimpse into the challenges of agricultural livelihoods and environmental repercussions. And who can forget the classic "Charlotte's Web" by E.B. White, where a spider named Charlotte weaves her web of wit and wisdom in a barn filled with lovable farm animals.

As we pivot to a more visual medium, TV shows such as "Dirty Jobs" and "How It's Made" provide insight into the processes behind agricultural production and the associated environmental considerations. After all, who wouldn't want to learn about cotton farming while watching our favorite TV host get down and dirty in the cotton fields?

Now, back to our serious academic discussion. The existing literature sets the stage for our exploration of the intricate relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas – an inquiry that promises to unveil more surprises than a jack-in-the-box. Through our research, we aim to peel back the layers of this complex connection, planting the seeds for a deeper understanding of the environmental implications at hand.


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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and USDA . 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]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the saying goes, "Inhale the good stuff, exhale the bad stuff," but what if the bad stuff lingers in the air longer than a knock-knock joke? That's the predicament facing Harrison, Arkansas, where the presence of air pollutants has stirred up more questions than a curious cat at a science fair. The link between these pollutants and GMO cotton use in the area has left many scratching their heads, wondering if there's something more than just "lint" in the air.
The partnership between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and agriculture has been a hot topic in recent years, akin to a spicy jalapeño pepper in a bowl of mild salsa. And when it comes to cotton cultivation in Arkansas, the debate has expanded faster than a batch of yeast in a warm dough. This paper aims to peel back the layers of this complex relationship and see if there's more than just a "thread" connecting GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison.
In the quest to unravel this knotty problem, we've turned to data that's been more meticulously organized than a neat-freak's sock drawer. With statistical techniques sharper than a farmer's plow, we've dug into the numbers to uncover patterns that are more intriguing than a hidden treasure on a pirate ship. Our analysis produced results that were more significant than finding a relevant corny pun at a GMO conference – with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a stronger connection than spaghetti to a meatball.
The presence of air pollutants floating around Harrison has raised more eyebrows than a surprise party at a unibrow convention. And when we consider the simultaneous rise in GMO cotton use, we can't help but wonder if the correlation is more than just a "fluffy" coincidence. It's almost as if the air is whispering, "Cotton, I am your pollutant" in a Darth Vader voice.
In shedding light on this intricate web of cotton, pollutants, and environmental impact, we hope to cultivate a greater understanding of the implications that reach higher than a beanstalk in a fairy tale. Perhaps this study will open the door to exploring unrecognized relationships in agricultural practices, putting the "fun" in fungicide and the "laughter" in agriculture.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To peel back the layers of the cotton-pollution conundrum, our research team embarked on a journey through the tangled fields of data analysis, armed with statistical tools and a willingness to embrace the unexpected. We didn't just want to scratch the surface; we wanted to dig deep into the fluffy soil of GMO cotton use and the murky haze of air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas.

First, we scoured the vast expanse of the internet, navigating through more virtual cotton fields than a digital scarecrow. Our primary sources of data hailed from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), two pillars of information more reliable than a grandfather clock at high noon. We gathered data spanning from 2000 to 2022, ensuring that our analysis captured a timeline as extensive as a long-winded parent's story.

With our data haul in tow, we embarked on a journey through the statistical wilderness, employing a variety of analysis techniques to decipher the relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution. Our approach was as methodical as a spider spinning its web, weaving together different methods with the precision of a master tailor crafting a bespoke suit.

Using correlation coefficient calculations, we sought to unveil the strength and direction of the relationship between GMO cotton cultivation and air pollutants. Our calculations were more precise than a dancer executing a pirouette, leaving no room for statistical missteps. We also performed regression analyses, delving into the predictive power of GMO cotton use on air pollution levels, because sometimes, you have to predict the rainy days even if you're not a weatherman.

To further enrich our analysis, we employed spatial mapping techniques to visualize the geographical spread of air pollutants in relation to the cotton fields. It was like creating a digital treasure map, X-marking the spots where the air was less "clean" and more "green" with pollution.

In addition to these conventional statistical methods, we didn't shy away from leveraging the power of machine learning algorithms to uncover hidden patterns in the data. It was like recruiting an army of data-savvy robots to assist us in the quest for enlightenment, because who doesn't want a friendly robot sidekick?

Amidst all the number-crunching and algorithmic acrobatics, we embraced the unpredictability of research, knowing that sometimes, the most groundbreaking discoveries come from unexpected corners of the data world. We were determined to leave no statistical stone unturned and no data point unexamined, because as researchers, it's our duty to explore every avenue, even if it's as winding as a rambling country road.

And as our research methods danced between the realms of traditional statistics and cutting-edge analytics, we couldn't help but marvel at the cotton-pollution puzzle, a mystery that kept us on our toes like a fiddler crab in a salsa competition.

Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with, once you're done chuckling at my statistical shenanigans!


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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and USDA .

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8358008, r-squared of 0.6985630, 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]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As the saying goes, "Inhale the good stuff, exhale the bad stuff," but what if the bad stuff lingers in the air longer than a knock-knock joke? That's the predicament facing Harrison, Arkansas, where the presence of air pollutants has stirred up more questions than a curious cat at a science fair. The link between these pollutants and GMO cotton use in the area has left many scratching their heads, wondering if there's something more than just "lint" in the air.
The partnership between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and agriculture has been a hot topic in recent years, akin to a spicy jalapeño pepper in a bowl of mild salsa. And when it comes to cotton cultivation in Arkansas, the debate has expanded faster than a batch of yeast in a warm dough. This paper aims to peel back the layers of this complex relationship and see if there's more than just a "thread" connecting GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison.
In the quest to unravel this knotty problem, we've turned to data that's been more meticulously organized than a neat-freak's sock drawer. With statistical techniques sharper than a farmer's plow, we've dug into the numbers to uncover patterns that are more intriguing than a hidden treasure on a pirate ship. Our analysis produced results that were more significant than finding a relevant corny pun at a GMO conference – with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a stronger connection than spaghetti to a meatball.
The presence of air pollutants floating around Harrison has raised more eyebrows than a surprise party at a unibrow convention. And when we consider the simultaneous rise in GMO cotton use, we can't help but wonder if the correlation is more than just a "fluffy" coincidence. It's almost as if the air is whispering, "Cotton, I am your pollutant" in a Darth Vader voice.
In shedding light on this intricate web of cotton, pollutants, and environmental impact, we hope to cultivate a greater understanding of the implications that reach higher than a beanstalk in a fairy tale. Perhaps this study will open the door to exploring unrecognized relationships in agricultural practices, putting the "fun" in fungicide and the "laughter" in agriculture.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data from the year 2000 to 2022 uncovered a robust correlation between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the presence of air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008. This relationship was further supported by the r-squared value of 0.6985630, indicating that approximately 70% of the variation in air pollution can be explained by the variation in GMO cotton use. It seems the relationship between cotton and air pollution is as tight as a lint roller's grip on a fuzzy sweater.

Further bolstering our findings, the p-value of less than 0.01 indicated a high level of statistical significance, leaving little room for doubt about the association between these two variables. The connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution is clearer than the air on a windy day after a thorough dusting.

To visually encapsulate this striking relationship, a scatterplot (Fig. 1) was constructed, illustrating the strong positive correlation between GMO cotton use and air pollution. The plot effectively captures the trend, leaving no room for misinterpretation – much like a glaring typo in the middle of an otherwise impeccable manuscript.

As we unravel the interwoven threads of GMO cotton use and air pollution, it becomes evident that the relationship between these two factors is more than just a "cotton-pickin'" observation. It is a poignant reminder of the interconnectedness of agricultural practices and environmental repercussions, and perhaps a gentle nudge to take a deeper whiff of the impact of our cultivation choices.

This air-y connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas is not just blowing in the wind; it's firmly grounded in our empirical findings. In the immortal words of the cotton fields, "I'm lintertwined with air pollution, and I'm definitely not alone in this field!"


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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research has delved into the connection between air pollution and agricultural practices in various regions, aiming to untangle the web of environmental factors at play. Smith et al. (2015) emphasized the impact of agricultural activities on air quality, highlighting the need for comprehensive studies to understand the implications of these interactions. Similarly, Doe (2018) examined the influence of genetically modified organism (GMO) use on environmental factors, shedding light on the potential consequences of GMO cultivation on air quality. Jones (2019) further expanded on this topic, drawing attention to the complex relationship between agricultural practices and air pollution.
Now, let's shift gears and take a walk on the lighter side of literature. In "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, the author delves into the intricacies of modern agriculture and its environmental impact, offering a thought-provoking exploration of our food production systems. On the more whimsical side, "The Secret Life of Bees" by Sue Monk Kidd paints a vivid picture of life on a beekeeping farm, reminding us of the interconnectedness of nature and human activity.
In the land of fiction, "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck captures the struggles of farmers during the Dust Bowl era, providing a poignant glimpse into the challenges of agricultural livelihoods and environmental repercussions. And who can forget the classic "Charlotte's Web" by E.B. White, where a spider named Charlotte weaves her web of wit and wisdom in a barn filled with lovable farm animals.
As we pivot to a more visual medium, TV shows such as "Dirty Jobs" and "How It's Made" provide insight into the processes behind agricultural production and the associated environmental considerations. After all, who wouldn't want to learn about cotton farming while watching our favorite TV host get down and dirty in the cotton fields?
Now, back to our serious academic discussion. The existing literature sets the stage for our exploration of the intricate relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas – an inquiry that promises to unveil more surprises than a jack-in-the-box. Through our research, we aim to peel back the layers of this complex connection, planting the seeds for a deeper understanding of the environmental implications at hand.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data from the year 2000 to 2022 uncovered a robust correlation between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the presence of air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008. This relationship was further supported by the r-squared value of 0.6985630, indicating that approximately 70% of the variation in air pollution can be explained by the variation in GMO cotton use. It seems the relationship between cotton and air pollution is as tight as a lint roller's grip on a fuzzy sweater.
Further bolstering our findings, the p-value of less than 0.01 indicated a high level of statistical significance, leaving little room for doubt about the association between these two variables. The connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution is clearer than the air on a windy day after a thorough dusting.
To visually encapsulate this striking relationship, a scatterplot (Fig. 1) was constructed, illustrating the strong positive correlation between GMO cotton use and air pollution. The plot effectively captures the trend, leaving no room for misinterpretation – much like a glaring typo in the middle of an otherwise impeccable manuscript.
As we unravel the interwoven threads of GMO cotton use and air pollution, it becomes evident that the relationship between these two factors is more than just a "cotton-pickin'" observation. It is a poignant reminder of the interconnectedness of agricultural practices and environmental repercussions, and perhaps a gentle nudge to take a deeper whiff of the impact of our cultivation choices.
This air-y connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas is not just blowing in the wind; it's firmly grounded in our empirical findings. In the immortal words of the cotton fields, "I'm lintertwined with air pollution, and I'm definitely not alone in this field!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

In the illustrious words of Groucho Marx, "The only way to keep your health is to eat what you don't want, drink what you don't like, and do what you'd rather not." Similarly, the connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas seems to be playing a whimsical game of agricultural hide-and-seek with our environmental health. Our findings not only lend support to prior research, but they also unveil a compelling link that can no longer be brushed off like dust on a cotton bale.

The literature review, akin to a treasure trove of scholarly delights, laid the groundwork for our exploration. Like a seasoned detective following a trail of breadcrumbs, we scrutinized the intricate relationship between agricultural practices and air pollution, with a lighthearted nod to the fictional and visual realms where the pulse of agricultural life beats with whimsy. This whimsy, however, has transformed into tangible evidence through our research, anchoring the airy connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution in empirical reality.

In consonance with the works of Smith et al. (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2019), our study amplifies the chorus of agricultural impact on air quality, harmonizing with the melodies of previous findings like a choir in perfect pitch. The relationship uncovered between GMO cotton use and air pollution resonates loudly, echoing the sentiments of these prior researchers in an environmental saga worthy of a cotton-pickin' ballad.

The robust correlation coefficient and r-squared value uncovered in our study provide concrete evidence to support the idea that the link between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas is as clear as the spring sky after a rainstorm. It's not just a theory; it's as solid as a bale of cotton, standing tall amid the winds of empirical scrutiny.

Turning to the scatterplot, it serves as a visual testament to the undeniable intertwining of GMO cotton use and air pollution, akin to a masterpiece hung in a scholarly gallery. This visual representation gives life to the data, painting a vivid picture of the relationship that leaves no room for doubt – much like the unwavering gaze of a stern academic mentor in a heated debate.

In closing, our research isn't just about unraveling the air-y connection between GMO cotton and air pollution; it's about fostering a deeper understanding of the environmental implications that lie beneath the surface of agricultural practices. It's a call to action, reminding us that every cottonseed sowed carries with it the potential to shape the air we breathe – a responsibility that shouldn't be brushed off like lint on a freshly washed shirt. So, let's dive into this conversation with the zeal of a dedicated researcher and the wit of a seasoned comedian, because in the end, the importance of the environment is no laughing matter.


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 Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas and GMO use in cotton in Arkansas. 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]]
"From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.

With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.

Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the saying goes, "Inhale the good stuff, exhale the bad stuff," but what if the bad stuff lingers in the air longer than a knock-knock joke? That's the predicament facing Harrison, Arkansas, where the presence of air pollutants has stirred up more questions than a curious cat at a science fair. The link between these pollutants and GMO cotton use in the area has left many scratching their heads, wondering if there's something more than just "lint" in the air.
The partnership between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and agriculture has been a hot topic in recent years, akin to a spicy jalapeño pepper in a bowl of mild salsa. And when it comes to cotton cultivation in Arkansas, the debate has expanded faster than a batch of yeast in a warm dough. This paper aims to peel back the layers of this complex relationship and see if there's more than just a "thread" connecting GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison.
In the quest to unravel this knotty problem, we've turned to data that's been more meticulously organized than a neat-freak's sock drawer. With statistical techniques sharper than a farmer's plow, we've dug into the numbers to uncover patterns that are more intriguing than a hidden treasure on a pirate ship. Our analysis produced results that were more significant than finding a relevant corny pun at a GMO conference – with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a stronger connection than spaghetti to a meatball.
The presence of air pollutants floating around Harrison has raised more eyebrows than a surprise party at a unibrow convention. And when we consider the simultaneous rise in GMO cotton use, we can't help but wonder if the correlation is more than just a "fluffy" coincidence. It's almost as if the air is whispering, "Cotton, I am your pollutant" in a Darth Vader voice.
In shedding light on this intricate web of cotton, pollutants, and environmental impact, we hope to cultivate a greater understanding of the implications that reach higher than a beanstalk in a fairy tale. Perhaps this study will open the door to exploring unrecognized relationships in agricultural practices, putting the "fun" in fungicide and the "laughter" in agriculture.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data from the year 2000 to 2022 uncovered a robust correlation between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the presence of air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8358008. This relationship was further supported by the r-squared value of 0.6985630, indicating that approximately 70% of the variation in air pollution can be explained by the variation in GMO cotton use. It seems the relationship between cotton and air pollution is as tight as a lint roller's grip on a fuzzy sweater.
Further bolstering our findings, the p-value of less than 0.01 indicated a high level of statistical significance, leaving little room for doubt about the association between these two variables. The connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution is clearer than the air on a windy day after a thorough dusting.
To visually encapsulate this striking relationship, a scatterplot (Fig. 1) was constructed, illustrating the strong positive correlation between GMO cotton use and air pollution. The plot effectively captures the trend, leaving no room for misinterpretation – much like a glaring typo in the middle of an otherwise impeccable manuscript.
As we unravel the interwoven threads of GMO cotton use and air pollution, it becomes evident that the relationship between these two factors is more than just a "cotton-pickin'" observation. It is a poignant reminder of the interconnectedness of agricultural practices and environmental repercussions, and perhaps a gentle nudge to take a deeper whiff of the impact of our cultivation choices.
This air-y connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas is not just blowing in the wind; it's firmly grounded in our empirical findings. In the immortal words of the cotton fields, "I'm lintertwined with air pollution, and I'm definitely not alone in this field!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has successfully untangled the complex relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas. The evidence presented leaves little room for doubt that there's more than just cotton fluff floating in the air – it's an air-y connection with significant implications. It seems that when it comes to cotton and air pollution, the correlation is as strong as the scent of freshly baked cookies in a warm kitchen.

Our findings provide a strong foundation for further exploration of the environmental impact of agricultural practices, offering a paradigm shift in understanding the broader repercussions of GMO cultivation. It's clear that the interaction between agricultural activities and environmental outcomes is no laughing matter, although we couldn't resist sprinkling in a few corny jokes along the way.

As we wrap up this paper, it's important to remember that while the connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution may seem as obvious as a bright red tomato in a field of green, further research may continue to cultivate our understanding of this fascinating link. But for now, it appears that we've sown the seeds of knowledge and reaped a bountiful harvest of insight into this unique relationship.

In a nutshell, the air-y connection between GMO cotton use and air pollution is a real phenomenon, and it's clear that this area of research is as ripe as a juicy watermelon in the summer sun. It's time to put a lid on this one and move on to new frontiers, leaving behind a trail of insights more illuminating than a light bulb in a dark room.

In the immortal words of a dad at a barbecue, "No more research is needed in this area – let's grill up some new ideas!"



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 From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Genetics and Air Quality


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 From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Research (ISAER)


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 From Cotton Fields to Polluted Skies: Unraveling the Air-y Connection Between GMO Cotton Use and Air Pollution in Harrison, Arkansas with an abstract of The intersection of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton cultivation and air pollution in the vibrant state of Arkansas has long been a puzzle, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder if there's more than just cotton fluff in the air. In this study, we set out to quell the curiosity and explore the potential link between the two, taking the road less traveled to unravel this mysterious connection.
With a data-driven approach that would make even the pickiest statistician proud, we utilized information from the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Agriculture to delve into the roots of the matter. Armed with correlation coefficient calculations that couldn't be beet (like the vegetable, get it?), we uncovered a striking coefficient of 0.8358008 and a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a strong relationship between GMO cotton use and air pollution in the region.
Our findings unearth a not-so-subtle relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the presence of air pollutants in the skies of Harrison, Arkansas, prompting us to ponder whether the interaction between the two is more than just a cotton-cident. As we shed light on this fungal connection (fungus? cotton? see what we did there), we hope to cultivate a deeper understanding of the environmental implications and perhaps branch out to explore further unexpected links in agricultural practices.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, air pollution, Harrison Arkansas, cotton cultivation, environmental implications, correlation coefficient, USDA data, EPA data, genetically modified organism, air pollutants, 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

Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Harrison, AR
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas

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

Correlation r = 0.8358008 (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 = 0.6985630 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 69.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Arkansas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 6.9E-7. 0.0000006875369677859218000000
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 0.84 in 6.9E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,454,467 random variables You don't actually need 1 million 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.

[ 0.65, 0.93 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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


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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas (Bad air quality days)0.03856750.0224090.05292480.02486190.01388890.01373630.01101930.021978000.005479450.005479450.005464480000000000.00273973
GMO use in cotton in Arkansas (GMO cotton %)2329372515122116452712131212813141012105




Why this works

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




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([0.0385675,0.022409,0.0529248,0.0248619,0.0138889,0.0137363,0.0110193,0.021978,0,0,0.00547945,0.00547945,0.00546448,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.00273973,])
array_2 = np.array([23,29,37,25,15,12,21,16,4,5,2,7,12,13,12,12,8,13,14,10,12,10,5,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Harrison, Arkansas"
array_2_name = "GMO use in cotton in Arkansas"

# 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?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!


Correlation ID: 3245 · Black Variable ID: 21826 · Red Variable ID: 780
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0