about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,666 · 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 National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point.  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 decrease in GMO use in Georgia cotton led to an unexpected infestation of unathletic moths. These moths had a peculiar attraction to lacrosse goals, forming miniature moth teams and disrupting the final championship game with their clumsy flying techniques, ultimately preventing the winning point.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image inspired by bauhaus, depicting a sun-drenched field in Georgia. In the center, a group of lacrosse champions stands triumphantly, holding their sticks high. The players are shown in strong, geometric forms, with bold contrasts of light and shadow. The cotton fields around them sway gently in the breeze, their genetically modified fibers glistening in the sunlight. The intricate lacrosse sticks crafted from the elastic GMO cotton are portrayed with simplified yet striking visual elements that capture their unique properties. The scene exudes a sense of modernity and athletic prowess, in line with the bauhaus aesthetic. 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 National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. 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: Surrealism Cutsy graphics a meme Low poly inspired by bauhaus
ChatGPT: inspired by bauhaus

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 National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point, in the following situation: The increased elasticity of genetically modified cotton fibers enabled players to make more precise lacrosse sticks, leading to unparalleled accuracy in their final shots.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a sun-drenched field in Georgia, a group of lacrosse champions stands triumphantly, holding their sticks high. The cotton fields around them sway gently in the breeze, the genetically modified fibers glistening in the sunlight. The intricate lacrosse sticks crafted from the elastic GMO cotton are poised to make the final point, with unparalleled accuracy, securing the team's victory as national champions.

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: [ inspired by bauhaus ] and depicting this scene: In a sun-drenched field in Georgia, a group of lacrosse champions stands triumphantly, holding their sticks high. The cotton fields around them sway gently in the breeze, the genetically modified fibers glistening in the sunlight. The intricate lacrosse sticks crafted from the elastic GMO cotton are poised to make the final point, with unparalleled accuracy, securing the team's victory as national champions. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image inspired by bauhaus, depicting a sun-drenched field in Georgia. In the center, a group of lacrosse champions stands triumphantly, holding their sticks high. The players are shown in strong, geometric forms, with bold contrasts of light and shadow. The cotton fields around them sway gently in the breeze, their genetically modified fibers glistening in the sunlight. The intricate lacrosse sticks crafted from the elastic GMO cotton are portrayed with simplified yet striking visual elements that capture their unique properties. The scene exudes a sense of modernity and athletic prowess, in line with the bauhaus aesthetic.

*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 National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point to decrease. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

The Journal of Genetic Threads

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from USDA and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 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]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Cotton, the "fabric of our lives" as the commercials charmingly remind us, has woven itself into the very fabric of human civilization. Its cultivation has had a profound impact on economies, societies, and even fashion choices. And with the advent of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the cotton industry has undergone a transformation not unlike a caterpillar turning into a brash butterfly.

Meanwhile, in the world of sports, lacrosse stands out as a game of skill, finesse, and the occasional bonkers goal from midfield. It's an American pastime with ancient roots, combining the agility of soccer, the physicality of hockey, and the strategy of chess (if you replace the rooks and bishops with determined players wielding sticks).

Now, what do these two seemingly unrelated worlds have in common? Buckle up, because we're about to embark on a journey that is as strange and bewildering as a platypus parading through a disco.

Our quest began with the simple question: could there be a connection between the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions? Yes, it sounds about as plausible as finding a unicorn in your backyard or receiving an invitation to a tea party from the Mad Hatter – yet we persisted in this pursuit of statistical tomfoolery.

So, armed with data from the USDA and Wikipedia, we set out to untangle this web of intrigue and absurdity. What we discovered would make even the most cynical statistician raise an eyebrow in bemusement. Our results revealed a correlation coefficient that could make even the most steadfast skeptic consider taking up astrology – 0.8796942, with a p-value so low, it wouldn't even clear the limbo bar at a beach party.

Now, we understand if you're rubbing your eyes and re-reading that last sentence. Yes, we are talking about a relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points that is stronger than a caffeinated orangutan. It's as if we stumbled upon the Rosetta Stone of agricultural lunacy crossed with sporting wackiness.

However, dear reader, we assure you that our investigation has been conducted with the seriousness of a penguin in a tuxedo shop. We're not here to pull your leg, though we might indulge in a pun or two along the way. We humbly offer our findings as a testament to the weird and wonderful world of data analysis, and we hope this paper will inspire further investigations into other seemingly absurd connections.

So, ready your minds and brace your funny bone, because we're about to delve into the inexplicable correlation between cotton GMO-nomics and the exhilarating world of lacrosse. It's a tapestry of statistical shenanigans and scientific silliness that will leave you wondering if the laws of cause and effect took a lunch break and let the universe run amok.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Cotton, the "fabric of our lives" as the commercials charmingly remind us, has woven itself into the very fabric of human civilization. Its cultivation has had a profound impact on economies, societies, and even fashion choices. And with the advent of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the cotton industry has undergone a transformation not unlike a caterpillar turning into a brash butterfly.
Meanwhile, in the world of sports, lacrosse stands out as a game of skill, finesse, and the occasional bonkers goal from midfield. It's an American pastime with ancient roots, combining the agility of soccer, the physicality of hockey, and the strategy of chess (if you replace the rooks and bishops with determined players wielding sticks).
Now, what do these two seemingly unrelated worlds have in common? Buckle up, because we're about to embark on a journey that is as strange and bewildering as a platypus parading through a disco.
Our quest began with the simple question: could there be a connection between the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions? Yes, it sounds about as plausible as finding a unicorn in your backyard or receiving an invitation to a tea party from the Mad Hatter – yet we persisted in this pursuit of statistical tomfoolery.
So, armed with data from the USDA and Wikipedia, we set out to untangle this web of intrigue and absurdity. What we discovered would make even the most cynical statistician raise an eyebrow in bemusement. Our results revealed a correlation coefficient that could make even the most steadfast skeptic consider taking up astrology – 0.8796942, with a p-value so low, it wouldn't even clear the limbo bar at a beach party.
Now, we understand if you're rubbing your eyes and re-reading that last sentence. Yes, we are talking about a relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points that is stronger than a caffeinated orangutan. It's as if we stumbled upon the Rosetta Stone of agricultural lunacy crossed with sporting wackiness.
However, dear reader, we assure you that our investigation has been conducted with the seriousness of a penguin in a tuxedo shop. We're not here to pull your leg, though we might indulge in a pun or two along the way. We humbly offer our findings as a testament to the weird and wonderful world of data analysis, and we hope this paper will inspire further investigations into other seemingly absurd connections.
So, ready your minds and brace your funny bone, because we're about to delve into the inexplicable correlation between cotton GMO-nomics and the exhilarating world of lacrosse. It's a tapestry of statistical shenanigans and scientific silliness that will leave you wondering if the laws of cause and effect took a lunch break and let the universe run amok.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith and Doe (2010) explored the impact of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on cotton cultivation, focusing on the economic ramifications in the state of Georgia. Their study delves into the intricacies of GMO adoption, yield outcomes, and the implications for agricultural sustainability. The authors find that GMO adoption has indeed led to notable changes in cotton production, with implications for both farmers and the broader cotton industry.

Jones (2015) conducted a comprehensive analysis of the factors influencing the performance of national lacrosse teams in championship games. Their study investigates player statistics, coaching strategies, and even the impact of climate on gameplay. The findings shed light on the multifaceted nature of lacrosse performance, uncovering a range of variables that may affect the final outcome of championship matches.

In "The Cotton Revolution" by Beckert (2011), the author offers a historical account of the cotton industry, tracing its evolution from the antebellum South to the modern era. The book provides a gripping narrative of the cotton trade's impact on global economies, labor practices, and technological advancements. Though not directly related to GMO use, the historical context presented in this work offers valuable insights into the broader dynamics of cotton production.

On the fictional side, "The Lacrosse Chronicles" by Swift (2007) presents a series of fantastical stories set in the world of lacrosse, blending elements of magic, mystery, and, of course, plenty of well-placed goals. While purely imaginative, this work offers a whimsical take on the sport and may inspire readers to consider lacrosse from a more unconventional perspective.

Turning to animated entertainment, the cartoon "Lax Bros: The Stick-Slinging Adventures" offers a lighthearted portrayal of lacrosse players navigating both the challenges of the game and the quirks of everyday life. While not a scholarly source by any stretch, this cartoon series manages to capture the essence of lacrosse culture, complete with exaggerated slapstick humor and anthropomorphic lax sticks.

And let's not forget the classic children's show "The Magic Cottonfield," where a group of precocious youngsters stumble upon a mystical cotton field that grants them extraordinary athletic abilities. While purely fictional, this show manages to blend the inexplicable allure of cotton with the whimsy of supernatural athleticism, creating a delightful romp for young viewers.

Wasn't that a delightful mix of scholarly pursuits and entertaining escapes? But fear not, dear reader, for our investigation into the cotton GMO-lacrosse point connection is just getting started. So, buckle up and prepare for a journey that is as unexpected as finding a chocolate bar in the library - mesmerizing, confusing, and overall quite satisfying.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Wikipedia . 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]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Cotton, the "fabric of our lives" as the commercials charmingly remind us, has woven itself into the very fabric of human civilization. Its cultivation has had a profound impact on economies, societies, and even fashion choices. And with the advent of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the cotton industry has undergone a transformation not unlike a caterpillar turning into a brash butterfly.
Meanwhile, in the world of sports, lacrosse stands out as a game of skill, finesse, and the occasional bonkers goal from midfield. It's an American pastime with ancient roots, combining the agility of soccer, the physicality of hockey, and the strategy of chess (if you replace the rooks and bishops with determined players wielding sticks).
Now, what do these two seemingly unrelated worlds have in common? Buckle up, because we're about to embark on a journey that is as strange and bewildering as a platypus parading through a disco.
Our quest began with the simple question: could there be a connection between the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions? Yes, it sounds about as plausible as finding a unicorn in your backyard or receiving an invitation to a tea party from the Mad Hatter – yet we persisted in this pursuit of statistical tomfoolery.
So, armed with data from the USDA and Wikipedia, we set out to untangle this web of intrigue and absurdity. What we discovered would make even the most cynical statistician raise an eyebrow in bemusement. Our results revealed a correlation coefficient that could make even the most steadfast skeptic consider taking up astrology – 0.8796942, with a p-value so low, it wouldn't even clear the limbo bar at a beach party.
Now, we understand if you're rubbing your eyes and re-reading that last sentence. Yes, we are talking about a relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points that is stronger than a caffeinated orangutan. It's as if we stumbled upon the Rosetta Stone of agricultural lunacy crossed with sporting wackiness.
However, dear reader, we assure you that our investigation has been conducted with the seriousness of a penguin in a tuxedo shop. We're not here to pull your leg, though we might indulge in a pun or two along the way. We humbly offer our findings as a testament to the weird and wonderful world of data analysis, and we hope this paper will inspire further investigations into other seemingly absurd connections.
So, ready your minds and brace your funny bone, because we're about to delve into the inexplicable correlation between cotton GMO-nomics and the exhilarating world of lacrosse. It's a tapestry of statistical shenanigans and scientific silliness that will leave you wondering if the laws of cause and effect took a lunch break and let the universe run amok.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To uncover the enigmatic link between GMO cotton in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions, we assembled a crack team of research elves armed with an arsenal of statistical analyses and a penchant for puns. Our data collection methods may not have involved a high-speed chase or a daring heist, but they were certainly no less thrilling in their own right.

First, we scoured the vast plains of the internet, braving the treacherous swamps of random websites and the towering peaks of reputable databases. Ultimately, we relied on the gallant USDA for comprehensive agricultural statistics and the trusty steed known as Wikipedia for a broader view of lacrosse championships and their final scores.

Armed with a potent mixture of curiosity, skepticism, and a bit too much caffeine, we sifted through data spanning from 2000 to 2022, meticulously documenting every hint of cotton GMO usage and every final point scored in the nail-biting matches of lacrosse showdowns.

Our quest wasn't just about crunching numbers in the comfort of our (admittedly not-so-ivory) tower. No, we ventured out into the cotton fields of Georgia, where the air was thick with the promise of data and the occasional whiff of freshly spun puns. We spoke with farmers, researchers, and even a few scarecrows who seemed oddly well-informed about statistical methods – a testament to the pervasive nature of our research.

Back in our laboratory, which may or may not have been a whimsically adorned den of statistical sorcery, we whipped out a variety of statistical tools akin to a magician with a deck of cards. Regression analyses, correlation coefficients, and p-values danced merrily around us, as if to say, "Presto! Here's a correlation you'll never believe!"

As with any scientific endeavor, we encountered our fair share of unexpected obstacles – from data quirks that raised an eyebrow to the occasional rogue statistical outlier that seemed to mock our attempts at coherence. Like intrepid adventurers, we navigated these challenges with the grace of a startled flamingo on an ice rink, determined to unravel the mysteries that lay before us.

In the end, the results of our analysis took us on a rollercoaster ride of astonishment and bemusement. The correlation coefficient stood tall and proud, daring us to believe in the unbelievable, while the p-value whispered secrets of significance with a mischievous grin.

So, with data in hand and a hodgepodge of statistical incantations at our disposal, we set out to explore the absurd, to venture into the outlandish, and to present the world with a connection so delightfully nonsensical that it would make even the whimsical Cheshire Cat pause and ponder.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8796942, r-squared of 0.7738619, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Cotton, the "fabric of our lives" as the commercials charmingly remind us, has woven itself into the very fabric of human civilization. Its cultivation has had a profound impact on economies, societies, and even fashion choices. And with the advent of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the cotton industry has undergone a transformation not unlike a caterpillar turning into a brash butterfly.
Meanwhile, in the world of sports, lacrosse stands out as a game of skill, finesse, and the occasional bonkers goal from midfield. It's an American pastime with ancient roots, combining the agility of soccer, the physicality of hockey, and the strategy of chess (if you replace the rooks and bishops with determined players wielding sticks).
Now, what do these two seemingly unrelated worlds have in common? Buckle up, because we're about to embark on a journey that is as strange and bewildering as a platypus parading through a disco.
Our quest began with the simple question: could there be a connection between the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions? Yes, it sounds about as plausible as finding a unicorn in your backyard or receiving an invitation to a tea party from the Mad Hatter – yet we persisted in this pursuit of statistical tomfoolery.
So, armed with data from the USDA and Wikipedia, we set out to untangle this web of intrigue and absurdity. What we discovered would make even the most cynical statistician raise an eyebrow in bemusement. Our results revealed a correlation coefficient that could make even the most steadfast skeptic consider taking up astrology – 0.8796942, with a p-value so low, it wouldn't even clear the limbo bar at a beach party.
Now, we understand if you're rubbing your eyes and re-reading that last sentence. Yes, we are talking about a relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points that is stronger than a caffeinated orangutan. It's as if we stumbled upon the Rosetta Stone of agricultural lunacy crossed with sporting wackiness.
However, dear reader, we assure you that our investigation has been conducted with the seriousness of a penguin in a tuxedo shop. We're not here to pull your leg, though we might indulge in a pun or two along the way. We humbly offer our findings as a testament to the weird and wonderful world of data analysis, and we hope this paper will inspire further investigations into other seemingly absurd connections.
So, ready your minds and brace your funny bone, because we're about to delve into the inexplicable correlation between cotton GMO-nomics and the exhilarating world of lacrosse. It's a tapestry of statistical shenanigans and scientific silliness that will leave you wondering if the laws of cause and effect took a lunch break and let the universe run amok.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation into the relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions are as eye-popping as a surprise birthday cake in a library. Our data analysis led to a discovery that could make even the most stoic scientist do a double-take.

We calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8796942, suggesting a connection stronger than the magnetic attraction between a fridge and a well-decorated grocery list. This coefficient indicates a robust positive correlation between the two variables, demonstrating that as the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation increased, the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions also saw a notable boost. It's almost as if the cotton fields of Georgia were whispering secrets to lacrosse players, urging them to score big.

The r-squared value of 0.7738619 further reinforces the strength of this connection, akin to a rock-solid handshake between statistics and significance. This value indicates that approximately 77.39% of the variation in lacrosse champions' final points could be explained by the variation in GMO cotton use. This statistical clasp of hands firmly supports the notion that there's more to this relationship than mere happenstance.

Complementing these findings, the p-value of less than 0.01 is as rare as a unicorn sighting in Times Square. This minuscule p-value provides compelling evidence against the null hypothesis and reinforces the notion that the observed relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points is not a product of random chance. It's as if the statistical stars aligned to spell out "G - M - O" in cosmic patterns, pointing directly at the lacrosse field.

To visually encapsulate this revelatory relationship, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that vividly illustrates the striking correlation between GMO cotton use and National Lacrosse Champions' final points. This graphical representation offers a visual feast for the analytical soul, serving as a testament to the unexpected dance of data points and the rhythmic harmony of statistical patterns.

In summary, our results indicate a dizzyingly strong association between the use of GMOs in Georgia's cotton fields and the final points amassed by the National Lacrosse Champions. This connection is as confounding as a riddle told by a science-minded Sphinx, and we invite further exploration and scrutiny of this surprising correlation.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith and Doe (2010) explored the impact of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on cotton cultivation, focusing on the economic ramifications in the state of Georgia. Their study delves into the intricacies of GMO adoption, yield outcomes, and the implications for agricultural sustainability. The authors find that GMO adoption has indeed led to notable changes in cotton production, with implications for both farmers and the broader cotton industry.
Jones (2015) conducted a comprehensive analysis of the factors influencing the performance of national lacrosse teams in championship games. Their study investigates player statistics, coaching strategies, and even the impact of climate on gameplay. The findings shed light on the multifaceted nature of lacrosse performance, uncovering a range of variables that may affect the final outcome of championship matches.
In "The Cotton Revolution" by Beckert (2011), the author offers a historical account of the cotton industry, tracing its evolution from the antebellum South to the modern era. The book provides a gripping narrative of the cotton trade's impact on global economies, labor practices, and technological advancements. Though not directly related to GMO use, the historical context presented in this work offers valuable insights into the broader dynamics of cotton production.
On the fictional side, "The Lacrosse Chronicles" by Swift (2007) presents a series of fantastical stories set in the world of lacrosse, blending elements of magic, mystery, and, of course, plenty of well-placed goals. While purely imaginative, this work offers a whimsical take on the sport and may inspire readers to consider lacrosse from a more unconventional perspective.
Turning to animated entertainment, the cartoon "Lax Bros: The Stick-Slinging Adventures" offers a lighthearted portrayal of lacrosse players navigating both the challenges of the game and the quirks of everyday life. While not a scholarly source by any stretch, this cartoon series manages to capture the essence of lacrosse culture, complete with exaggerated slapstick humor and anthropomorphic lax sticks.
And let's not forget the classic children's show "The Magic Cottonfield," where a group of precocious youngsters stumble upon a mystical cotton field that grants them extraordinary athletic abilities. While purely fictional, this show manages to blend the inexplicable allure of cotton with the whimsy of supernatural athleticism, creating a delightful romp for young viewers.
Wasn't that a delightful mix of scholarly pursuits and entertaining escapes? But fear not, dear reader, for our investigation into the cotton GMO-lacrosse point connection is just getting started. So, buckle up and prepare for a journey that is as unexpected as finding a chocolate bar in the library - mesmerizing, confusing, and overall quite satisfying.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions are as eye-popping as a surprise birthday cake in a library. Our data analysis led to a discovery that could make even the most stoic scientist do a double-take.
We calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8796942, suggesting a connection stronger than the magnetic attraction between a fridge and a well-decorated grocery list. This coefficient indicates a robust positive correlation between the two variables, demonstrating that as the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation increased, the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions also saw a notable boost. It's almost as if the cotton fields of Georgia were whispering secrets to lacrosse players, urging them to score big.
The r-squared value of 0.7738619 further reinforces the strength of this connection, akin to a rock-solid handshake between statistics and significance. This value indicates that approximately 77.39% of the variation in lacrosse champions' final points could be explained by the variation in GMO cotton use. This statistical clasp of hands firmly supports the notion that there's more to this relationship than mere happenstance.
Complementing these findings, the p-value of less than 0.01 is as rare as a unicorn sighting in Times Square. This minuscule p-value provides compelling evidence against the null hypothesis and reinforces the notion that the observed relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points is not a product of random chance. It's as if the statistical stars aligned to spell out "G - M - O" in cosmic patterns, pointing directly at the lacrosse field.
To visually encapsulate this revelatory relationship, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that vividly illustrates the striking correlation between GMO cotton use and National Lacrosse Champions' final points. This graphical representation offers a visual feast for the analytical soul, serving as a testament to the unexpected dance of data points and the rhythmic harmony of statistical patterns.
In summary, our results indicate a dizzyingly strong association between the use of GMOs in Georgia's cotton fields and the final points amassed by the National Lacrosse Champions. This connection is as confounding as a riddle told by a science-minded Sphinx, and we invite further exploration and scrutiny of this surprising correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings have unearthed a connection so uncannily intriguing it could make even the most staid statistician do a double take and reach for a caffeinated beverage. The robust correlation we've uncovered between GMO cotton use in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions is as improbable as stumbling upon a beaker of unicorn tears in a science lab. As much as it may sound like a statistical tall tale, our results bolster the prior research into GMO adoption in cotton cultivation and the multifaceted variables impacting lacrosse championship performances.

Smith and Doe's (2010) exploration of GMOs in cotton laid the groundwork for our investigation, and little did they know that their economic ramifications of GMO adoption would intertwine with the world of lacrosse. Our findings align with their observations, revealing notable changes in cotton production and now, an unexpected link to athletic achievements. It's almost as though the cotton plants themselves have donned lacrosse sticks and joined in the game.

The work of Jones (2015) delved into the varied factors influencing national lacrosse team performance, uncovering a rich tapestry of variables that could sway the outcome of championship matches. Our results lend support to this multifaceted nature of lacrosse performance, offering a new twist by introducing the seemingly improbable influence of cotton GMOs. It's as if Mother Nature decided to toss a curveball into the already complex ecosystem of championship athletics.

Additionally, our findings are a testament to the unexpected intersections of seemingly unrelated realms. Just as "The Magic Cottonfield" and "Lax Bros: The Stick-Slinging Adventures" bridged the worlds of fantastical cotton fields and animated athleticism, our research has uncovered a tangible bridge between GMOs and lacrosse glory. Who knew that statistical significance could reveal such an unlikely kinship between agricultural cultivation and athletic triumph?

In conclusion - well, almost, but not quite - our study has sparked a scientific eyebrow raise of epic proportions, and we eagerly anticipate further exploration of this whimsically absurd but statistically robust correlation. As we continue to delve into this cotton GMO-lacrosse point connection, we invite fellow researchers to join us in this delightfully perplexing journey. After all, the scientific world could certainly use a dash of the unexpected, much like a sprinkle of humor in a dense academic paper.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in Georgia and National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.

While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Cotton, the "fabric of our lives" as the commercials charmingly remind us, has woven itself into the very fabric of human civilization. Its cultivation has had a profound impact on economies, societies, and even fashion choices. And with the advent of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the cotton industry has undergone a transformation not unlike a caterpillar turning into a brash butterfly.
Meanwhile, in the world of sports, lacrosse stands out as a game of skill, finesse, and the occasional bonkers goal from midfield. It's an American pastime with ancient roots, combining the agility of soccer, the physicality of hockey, and the strategy of chess (if you replace the rooks and bishops with determined players wielding sticks).
Now, what do these two seemingly unrelated worlds have in common? Buckle up, because we're about to embark on a journey that is as strange and bewildering as a platypus parading through a disco.
Our quest began with the simple question: could there be a connection between the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions? Yes, it sounds about as plausible as finding a unicorn in your backyard or receiving an invitation to a tea party from the Mad Hatter – yet we persisted in this pursuit of statistical tomfoolery.
So, armed with data from the USDA and Wikipedia, we set out to untangle this web of intrigue and absurdity. What we discovered would make even the most cynical statistician raise an eyebrow in bemusement. Our results revealed a correlation coefficient that could make even the most steadfast skeptic consider taking up astrology – 0.8796942, with a p-value so low, it wouldn't even clear the limbo bar at a beach party.
Now, we understand if you're rubbing your eyes and re-reading that last sentence. Yes, we are talking about a relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points that is stronger than a caffeinated orangutan. It's as if we stumbled upon the Rosetta Stone of agricultural lunacy crossed with sporting wackiness.
However, dear reader, we assure you that our investigation has been conducted with the seriousness of a penguin in a tuxedo shop. We're not here to pull your leg, though we might indulge in a pun or two along the way. We humbly offer our findings as a testament to the weird and wonderful world of data analysis, and we hope this paper will inspire further investigations into other seemingly absurd connections.
So, ready your minds and brace your funny bone, because we're about to delve into the inexplicable correlation between cotton GMO-nomics and the exhilarating world of lacrosse. It's a tapestry of statistical shenanigans and scientific silliness that will leave you wondering if the laws of cause and effect took a lunch break and let the universe run amok.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions are as eye-popping as a surprise birthday cake in a library. Our data analysis led to a discovery that could make even the most stoic scientist do a double-take.
We calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8796942, suggesting a connection stronger than the magnetic attraction between a fridge and a well-decorated grocery list. This coefficient indicates a robust positive correlation between the two variables, demonstrating that as the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation increased, the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions also saw a notable boost. It's almost as if the cotton fields of Georgia were whispering secrets to lacrosse players, urging them to score big.
The r-squared value of 0.7738619 further reinforces the strength of this connection, akin to a rock-solid handshake between statistics and significance. This value indicates that approximately 77.39% of the variation in lacrosse champions' final points could be explained by the variation in GMO cotton use. This statistical clasp of hands firmly supports the notion that there's more to this relationship than mere happenstance.
Complementing these findings, the p-value of less than 0.01 is as rare as a unicorn sighting in Times Square. This minuscule p-value provides compelling evidence against the null hypothesis and reinforces the notion that the observed relationship between GMO cotton and lacrosse points is not a product of random chance. It's as if the statistical stars aligned to spell out "G - M - O" in cosmic patterns, pointing directly at the lacrosse field.
To visually encapsulate this revelatory relationship, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that vividly illustrates the striking correlation between GMO cotton use and National Lacrosse Champions' final points. This graphical representation offers a visual feast for the analytical soul, serving as a testament to the unexpected dance of data points and the rhythmic harmony of statistical patterns.
In summary, our results indicate a dizzyingly strong association between the use of GMOs in Georgia's cotton fields and the final points amassed by the National Lacrosse Champions. This connection is as confounding as a riddle told by a science-minded Sphinx, and we invite further exploration and scrutiny of this surprising correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

Conclusion

In conclusion, our research has unearthed a connection between GMO cotton and lacrosse points that's stronger than a Hulk hug. It's as if the cotton plants are sending secret messages to the lacrosse players, nudging them to score big and show the world the true fiber of their athleticism. Our findings dance more gracefully than a statistical tango, leaving us in awe of the unexpected harmony between agricultural innovation and sporting glory.

We urge future researchers to tread this path of eccentric exploration, for there's more to be unravelled in the whimsical world of statistical shenanigans. However, as much as we'd love to continue this wild romp through GMO-nomics and lacrosse, it's time to hang up our lab coats and declare that no further research in this area is needed. This correlation is as clear as day, and any more digging would be like desperately searching for meaning in a knock-knock joke.

So, let's raise our beakers to the delightfully absurd, the astoundingly zany, and the downright surprising. Science and statistics have once again proven that they're full of more twists and turns than a rollercoaster designed by a mischievous mathematician. May this study inspire future investigations into the wonderfully wacky connections hiding within the labyrinth of data. And with that, we bid adieu to this whirlwind of genetic cotton and competitive stick-wielding. Until we meet again in the land of statistical merriment and scientific silliness!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Genetic Threads


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Textile Innovation and Lacrosse 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 Cotton GMO-nomics: A Fiber-Tastic Connection to Lacrosse Glory with an abstract of In this study, we explore the intriguing relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Georgia and the final points scored by the National Lacrosse Champions. Utilizing data from the USDA and Wikipedia, our research team embarked on a quest to unravel this seemingly absurd correlation. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8796942 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2000 to 2022.
While these results may seem utterly preposterous, we assure the reader that our investigation has been conducted with utmost seriousness. From the bucolic cotton fields of Georgia to the dynamic lacrosse arenas, our data suggest an uncanny link between these two seemingly disparate domains. We acknowledge the inherent absurdity of our findings and invite further exploration of this delightfully ludicrous subject.

ChatGPT:

"Cotton GMOs in Georgia," "Genetically modified cotton," "Lacrosse championship points," "Correlation between cotton cultivation and lacrosse success," "USDA data on cotton production," "Wikipedia data on cotton cultivation," "Relationship between cotton farming and sports success," "Unusual correlations in agricultural and sports data," "Link between cotton production and athletic performance"

*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

National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point
Detailed data title: National Lacrosse Champions' Final Points
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point

Correlation r = 0.8796942 (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 = 0.7738619 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 77.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point) 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 3.2E-8. 0.0000000321283209440053800000
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 0.88 in 3.2E-6% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 31,125,187 random variables You don't actually need 31 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.

[ 0.73, 0.95 ] 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
National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point (Points)149138141916131412158911222222002




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([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([14,9,13,8,14,19,16,13,14,12,15,8,9,11,2,2,2,2,2,2,0,0,2,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in Georgia"
array_2_name = "National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point"

# 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?

Hats off to you for rating!


Correlation ID: 3666 · Black Variable ID: 770 · Red Variable ID: 133
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0