about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,816 · 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 Central City, Kentucky and the second variable is Brad Pitt's net worth.  The chart goes from 1987 to 2001, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image

AI explanation

As air pollution in Central City, Kentucky increased, the demand for pristine air also went up. This led Brad Pitt to capitalize on his newly patented product, "Fresh Pitt Air", a line of celebrity-endorsed, bottled oxygen. As people scrambled to buy his clean air products, Brad Pitt's net worth soared higher than the smog levels in Central City. It's a classic case of turning lemons into lemon-scented air fresheners!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Generate a high-tech image portraying Brad Pitt in a futuristic city setting in Central City, Kentucky. He is demonstrating cutting-edge air purifier technology amidst factories emitting smoke. Surrounding him are stacks of money symbolizing his wealth. The image should exude a sense of advanced technology and showcase the contrast between pollution and innovation. 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 Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. 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: Scalar art Oragami Data cyber art High-tech Surrealism
ChatGPT: High-tech

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 Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth, in the following situation: Because as air pollution increased in Central City, Kentucky, Brad Pitt invested in air purifier technology, making a fortune from its sales.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Central City, Kentucky, the air is thick with pollution as factories release smoke into the sky. Amidst the haze, Brad Pitt is seen showcasing an innovative air purifier technology, surrounded by stacks of money representing his impressive net worth.

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: [ High-tech ] and depicting this scene: In Central City, Kentucky, the air is thick with pollution as factories release smoke into the sky. Amidst the haze, Brad Pitt is seen showcasing an innovative air purifier technology, surrounded by stacks of money representing his impressive net worth. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Generate a high-tech image portraying Brad Pitt in a futuristic city setting in Central City, Kentucky. He is demonstrating cutting-edge air purifier technology amidst factories emitting smoke. Surrounding him are stacks of money symbolizing his wealth. The image should exude a sense of advanced technology and showcase the contrast between pollution and innovation.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky caused Brad Pitt's net worth to increase. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

The Journal of Celebrity Economics and Environmental Health

Jan 2024
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and p < 0.01 for 1987 to 2001.

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]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Air pollution is a pervasive and persistent environmental issue that has captured the attention of researchers, policymakers, and concerned citizens around the world. The detrimental effects of poor air quality on human health and the environment have been well-documented, with an array of studies exploring its relationship to respiratory diseases, cardiovascular problems, and even cognitive impairments. Meanwhile, in the realm of popular culture and celebrity gossip, the rise and fall of A-list actors' bank accounts often dominate the headlines, providing fodder for tabloids and perhaps a few envious sighs from the general public. It is within this unlikely juxtaposition of statistics and celebrity culture that we find ourselves delving into the unexpected and seemingly incongruous relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth.

With a sly smirk at the intersection of statistical analysis and Hollywood glitz, our study seeks to uncover the hidden threads that may unpredictably link these two disparate phenomena. Behold the grand convergence of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, as we embody the spirit of statistical detectives, weaving through the cobweb of numbers and trends to unearth the mysterious correlation between air quality and the financial ups and downs of a certain Mr. Pitt. It is a tale of unexpected connections and quirky associations that challenges traditional research boundaries, demonstrating that sometimes, the most surprising revelations emerge from the most unconventional pairings.

As we embark on this statistical escapade, we are reminded of the whimsical nature of research, where the unexpected and the entertaining often lurk in the unlikeliest of places. So, buckle up and don your statistical spectacles as we venture into the realm of airborne particulate matter and celebrity wealth, for the results may just leave you pleasantly surprised and scratching your head in equal measure.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Air pollution is a pervasive and persistent environmental issue that has captured the attention of researchers, policymakers, and concerned citizens around the world. The detrimental effects of poor air quality on human health and the environment have been well-documented, with an array of studies exploring its relationship to respiratory diseases, cardiovascular problems, and even cognitive impairments. Meanwhile, in the realm of popular culture and celebrity gossip, the rise and fall of A-list actors' bank accounts often dominate the headlines, providing fodder for tabloids and perhaps a few envious sighs from the general public. It is within this unlikely juxtaposition of statistics and celebrity culture that we find ourselves delving into the unexpected and seemingly incongruous relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth.
With a sly smirk at the intersection of statistical analysis and Hollywood glitz, our study seeks to uncover the hidden threads that may unpredictably link these two disparate phenomena. Behold the grand convergence of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, as we embody the spirit of statistical detectives, weaving through the cobweb of numbers and trends to unearth the mysterious correlation between air quality and the financial ups and downs of a certain Mr. Pitt. It is a tale of unexpected connections and quirky associations that challenges traditional research boundaries, demonstrating that sometimes, the most surprising revelations emerge from the most unconventional pairings.
As we embark on this statistical escapade, we are reminded of the whimsical nature of research, where the unexpected and the entertaining often lurk in the unlikeliest of places. So, buckle up and don your statistical spectacles as we venture into the realm of airborne particulate matter and celebrity wealth, for the results may just leave you pleasantly surprised and scratching your head in equal measure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Previous research has illuminated the intricacies of air pollution's wide-ranging impacts on human health and the environment (Smith, 2010). Furthermore, studies have underscored the significant role of environmental factors in shaping economic trends and disparities (Doe, 2015). However, as we plunge into the less explored territory of Hollywood royalty and financial fluctuations, we find ourselves navigating a sea of tangential connections and unexpected correlations.

To begin, "Air Quality and Its Implications on Public Health" by Jones et al. (2018) delves into the intricate relationship between air pollution and its detrimental effects on public health, providing a comprehensive foundation for our investigation. The authors offer a sobering portrayal of the consequences of air pollution, weaving a compelling narrative of respiratory ailments and environmental degradation. Meanwhile, "Economic Indicators and Their Impact on Celebrity Wealth" by Brown (2016) presents an insightful analysis of the multifaceted influences that shape the financial trajectories of celebrities, setting the stage for our divergence into the realm of Brad Pitt's net worth.

Stepping beyond the confines of traditional research parameters, we draw inspiration from non-fictional literature that indirectly touches upon the interplay between industrial emissions and celebrity affluence. Works such as "Emissions and Economics: The Unseen Forces" by Green (2017), and "Celebrity Economics: Beyond the Red Carpet" by Grey (2014) provide glimpses of the broader contexts that frame our investigation. Delving into the realm of fiction, the surrealistic landscape of Murakami's "Kafka on the Shore" and the sharp social commentary within Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" offer an oblique lens through which we may contemplate unexpected connections and peculiar associations. Furthermore, board games such as Monopoly and The Game of Life, with their mirroring of financial fluctuations and broader economic factors, subtly but decidedly shape our mindset as we navigate the intricate web of air quality and net worth disparities.

As we embark on this journey of whimsy and statistical intrigue, we are prepared to embrace the unexpected and the absurd in our quest for enlightenment. For in the realm of research, sometimes the most surprising discoveries emerge from the unlikeliest of foundations, much like stumbling upon a rare and delightful treasure in the midst of an uncharted wilderness.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest . You used data from 1987 to 2001

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]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Air pollution is a pervasive and persistent environmental issue that has captured the attention of researchers, policymakers, and concerned citizens around the world. The detrimental effects of poor air quality on human health and the environment have been well-documented, with an array of studies exploring its relationship to respiratory diseases, cardiovascular problems, and even cognitive impairments. Meanwhile, in the realm of popular culture and celebrity gossip, the rise and fall of A-list actors' bank accounts often dominate the headlines, providing fodder for tabloids and perhaps a few envious sighs from the general public. It is within this unlikely juxtaposition of statistics and celebrity culture that we find ourselves delving into the unexpected and seemingly incongruous relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth.
With a sly smirk at the intersection of statistical analysis and Hollywood glitz, our study seeks to uncover the hidden threads that may unpredictably link these two disparate phenomena. Behold the grand convergence of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, as we embody the spirit of statistical detectives, weaving through the cobweb of numbers and trends to unearth the mysterious correlation between air quality and the financial ups and downs of a certain Mr. Pitt. It is a tale of unexpected connections and quirky associations that challenges traditional research boundaries, demonstrating that sometimes, the most surprising revelations emerge from the most unconventional pairings.
As we embark on this statistical escapade, we are reminded of the whimsical nature of research, where the unexpected and the entertaining often lurk in the unlikeliest of places. So, buckle up and don your statistical spectacles as we venture into the realm of airborne particulate matter and celebrity wealth, for the results may just leave you pleasantly surprised and scratching your head in equal measure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In order to unravel the enigmatic association between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the captivating fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth, we employed a combination of rigorous statistical analysis and a dash of whimsy. Our research approach was imbued with a hint of intrigue and a touch of divine intervention, as we sought to navigate the labyrinth of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest with both precision and panache.

We engaged in a thorough data mining expedition, utilizing a top-secret concoction of algorithms and spreadsheet sorcery to extract the treasure trove of information from the proverbial digital mines of the internet. While our reliance on the Environmental Protection Agency's data provided us with a breath of fresh air in terms of air quality statistics, our excavation of Brad Pitt's financial fortunes from The Richest allowed us to peek behind the velvet curtain of celebrity opulence.

With our temporal lens finely tuned, we scrutinized data spanning from 1987 to 2001, a period marked by the rise of grunge music, the fall of oversized shoulder pads, and the quiet revolution of internet dial-up connections. Our choice of this time frame was by no means arbitrary; rather, it was a meticulously calculated and strategically executed maneuver aimed at capturing the essence of an era where air pollution levels and Brad Pitt's net worth danced in a curious tango of statistical intrigue.

Once we had corralled our data sources, we embarked on a series of statistical acrobatics to unravel the potential correlation between these contrasting yet curiously entwined variables. Employing the mystical incantations of correlation analysis and regression modeling, we teased out the hidden patterns lurking within the depths of our data, seeking to decipher the cryptic language of statistical significance and correlation coefficients.

Our pursuit of statistical truth led us to uncover a correlation coefficient of 0.8836227, a value that sparked both astonishment and incredulity among our research team. With a p-value of less than 0.01, our findings transcended the realm of mere happenstance, beckoning us into the hallowed halls of statistical significance with a wink and a nod.

In our analysis, we adopted a cautiously bold and brazenly conservative approach, mindful of the potential confounding variables that may lurk in the shadows of statistical inference. Our models were meticulously tailored, akin to a bespoke suit crafted by the finest statistical tailors, ensuring that we accounted for the various nuances and idiosyncrasies that could sway our interpretations.

As we navigated the labyrinthine pathways of statistical exploration, we remained vigilant against the siren song of spurious correlations, steering our research vessel with the precision of seasoned navigators charting unknown statistical seas. The journey may have been fraught with twists and turns, but through the unwavering guidance of statistical principles, we emerged victorious, clutching the revelations of our unexpected findings with a mixture of scientific reverence and mischievous delight.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest .

For the time period 1987 to 2001, you found a correlation 0.8836227, r-squared of 0.7807891, 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]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Air pollution is a pervasive and persistent environmental issue that has captured the attention of researchers, policymakers, and concerned citizens around the world. The detrimental effects of poor air quality on human health and the environment have been well-documented, with an array of studies exploring its relationship to respiratory diseases, cardiovascular problems, and even cognitive impairments. Meanwhile, in the realm of popular culture and celebrity gossip, the rise and fall of A-list actors' bank accounts often dominate the headlines, providing fodder for tabloids and perhaps a few envious sighs from the general public. It is within this unlikely juxtaposition of statistics and celebrity culture that we find ourselves delving into the unexpected and seemingly incongruous relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth.
With a sly smirk at the intersection of statistical analysis and Hollywood glitz, our study seeks to uncover the hidden threads that may unpredictably link these two disparate phenomena. Behold the grand convergence of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, as we embody the spirit of statistical detectives, weaving through the cobweb of numbers and trends to unearth the mysterious correlation between air quality and the financial ups and downs of a certain Mr. Pitt. It is a tale of unexpected connections and quirky associations that challenges traditional research boundaries, demonstrating that sometimes, the most surprising revelations emerge from the most unconventional pairings.
As we embark on this statistical escapade, we are reminded of the whimsical nature of research, where the unexpected and the entertaining often lurk in the unlikeliest of places. So, buckle up and don your statistical spectacles as we venture into the realm of airborne particulate matter and celebrity wealth, for the results may just leave you pleasantly surprised and scratching your head in equal measure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis of the relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and Brad Pitt's net worth during the period 1987 to 2001 yields a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.8836227, indicating a strong positive relationship between the variables. This correlation is further supported by the r-squared value of 0.7807891, suggesting that approximately 78.1% of the variability in Brad Pitt's net worth can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Central City. The associated p-value, less than 0.01, reflects a high level of statistical significance, confirming the strength of the observed relationship.

The figure (Fig. 1) illustrates the scatterplot displaying the pronounced correlation between air pollution levels and Brad Pitt's net worth. The data points form a clear upward trend, highlighting the synchronous movements of these ostensibly dissimilar variables. As intriguing as it may seem, the findings underscore the unexpected interconnectedness between environmental factors and the financial fortunes of a Hollywood luminary.

The seemingly disparate realms of environmental science and celebrity economics collide in this statistical revelation, emphasizing the unanticipated, yet unequivocal association between air pollution and Brad Pitt's net worth. It serves as a poignant reminder that statistical investigations, much like Hollywood plotlines, can unfold in surprising, even whimsical ways, revealing unexpected relationships that prompt a raised eyebrow and, perhaps, a wry smile.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research has illuminated the intricacies of air pollution's wide-ranging impacts on human health and the environment (Smith, 2010). Furthermore, studies have underscored the significant role of environmental factors in shaping economic trends and disparities (Doe, 2015). However, as we plunge into the less explored territory of Hollywood royalty and financial fluctuations, we find ourselves navigating a sea of tangential connections and unexpected correlations.
To begin, "Air Quality and Its Implications on Public Health" by Jones et al. (2018) delves into the intricate relationship between air pollution and its detrimental effects on public health, providing a comprehensive foundation for our investigation. The authors offer a sobering portrayal of the consequences of air pollution, weaving a compelling narrative of respiratory ailments and environmental degradation. Meanwhile, "Economic Indicators and Their Impact on Celebrity Wealth" by Brown (2016) presents an insightful analysis of the multifaceted influences that shape the financial trajectories of celebrities, setting the stage for our divergence into the realm of Brad Pitt's net worth.
Stepping beyond the confines of traditional research parameters, we draw inspiration from non-fictional literature that indirectly touches upon the interplay between industrial emissions and celebrity affluence. Works such as "Emissions and Economics: The Unseen Forces" by Green (2017), and "Celebrity Economics: Beyond the Red Carpet" by Grey (2014) provide glimpses of the broader contexts that frame our investigation. Delving into the realm of fiction, the surrealistic landscape of Murakami's "Kafka on the Shore" and the sharp social commentary within Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" offer an oblique lens through which we may contemplate unexpected connections and peculiar associations. Furthermore, board games such as Monopoly and The Game of Life, with their mirroring of financial fluctuations and broader economic factors, subtly but decidedly shape our mindset as we navigate the intricate web of air quality and net worth disparities.
As we embark on this journey of whimsy and statistical intrigue, we are prepared to embrace the unexpected and the absurd in our quest for enlightenment. For in the realm of research, sometimes the most surprising discoveries emerge from the unlikeliest of foundations, much like stumbling upon a rare and delightful treasure in the midst of an uncharted wilderness.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and Brad Pitt's net worth during the period 1987 to 2001 yields a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.8836227, indicating a strong positive relationship between the variables. This correlation is further supported by the r-squared value of 0.7807891, suggesting that approximately 78.1% of the variability in Brad Pitt's net worth can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Central City. The associated p-value, less than 0.01, reflects a high level of statistical significance, confirming the strength of the observed relationship.
The figure (Fig. 1) illustrates the scatterplot displaying the pronounced correlation between air pollution levels and Brad Pitt's net worth. The data points form a clear upward trend, highlighting the synchronous movements of these ostensibly dissimilar variables. As intriguing as it may seem, the findings underscore the unexpected interconnectedness between environmental factors and the financial fortunes of a Hollywood luminary.
The seemingly disparate realms of environmental science and celebrity economics collide in this statistical revelation, emphasizing the unanticipated, yet unequivocal association between air pollution and Brad Pitt's net worth. It serves as a poignant reminder that statistical investigations, much like Hollywood plotlines, can unfold in surprising, even whimsical ways, revealing unexpected relationships that prompt a raised eyebrow and, perhaps, a wry smile.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The findings of our study offer compelling evidence of the unexpected and robust relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and Brad Pitt's net worth. The remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227, complemented by the r-squared value of 0.7807891, surpasses what one might typically expect to uncover when exploring such seemingly unconnected variables. These results not only echo the revelations of previous research on air pollution's influence on economic factors, but they also infuse an element of whimsy and incredulity into the typically staid field of statistical analysis.

Our investigation was driven by the need to explore beyond the well-trodden path of conventional research, delving into the realms of celebrity economics and environmental influences. In doing so, we found ourselves re-evaluating conventional wisdom and embracing the unexpected - a journey akin to navigating a maze of statistical oddities and marveling at the peculiar interconnectedness of our world.

The substantial statistical significance of the observed relationship, with a p-value of less than 0.01, serves as a gentle, yet firm reminder that the whims of statistical analysis can manifest in the most unlikely of places. As we consider the glaring upward trend depicted in the scatterplot, we are compelled to ponder the underlying mechanisms that drive this peculiar association. The notion that approximately 78.1% of the variability in Brad Pitt's net worth can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Central City reminds us that statistical relationships, much like celebrity romances, can be surprising and complex, defying simple explanations and venturing into the realm of delightful absurdity.

These results not only affirm the unexpected ties between environmental factors and celebrity wealth but also invite a playful reconsideration of the broader influences that shape the trajectories of individuals' financial fortunes. The echoes of literature, from the profound to the whimsical, remind us that science and art often intertwine in ways that can charm and confound, much like the unexpected relationship we have unveiled in our study.

In conclusion, our findings, while undoubtedly unconventional, contribute to the ever-expanding tapestry of statistical revelations, urging us to embrace the unexpected, pause to savor the delightful absurdities, and acknowledge that even the most peculiar variables can interlace in ways that stretch the limits of our imagination and statistical conventions.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's net worth. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Air pollution is a pervasive and persistent environmental issue that has captured the attention of researchers, policymakers, and concerned citizens around the world. The detrimental effects of poor air quality on human health and the environment have been well-documented, with an array of studies exploring its relationship to respiratory diseases, cardiovascular problems, and even cognitive impairments. Meanwhile, in the realm of popular culture and celebrity gossip, the rise and fall of A-list actors' bank accounts often dominate the headlines, providing fodder for tabloids and perhaps a few envious sighs from the general public. It is within this unlikely juxtaposition of statistics and celebrity culture that we find ourselves delving into the unexpected and seemingly incongruous relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth.
With a sly smirk at the intersection of statistical analysis and Hollywood glitz, our study seeks to uncover the hidden threads that may unpredictably link these two disparate phenomena. Behold the grand convergence of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, as we embody the spirit of statistical detectives, weaving through the cobweb of numbers and trends to unearth the mysterious correlation between air quality and the financial ups and downs of a certain Mr. Pitt. It is a tale of unexpected connections and quirky associations that challenges traditional research boundaries, demonstrating that sometimes, the most surprising revelations emerge from the most unconventional pairings.
As we embark on this statistical escapade, we are reminded of the whimsical nature of research, where the unexpected and the entertaining often lurk in the unlikeliest of places. So, buckle up and don your statistical spectacles as we venture into the realm of airborne particulate matter and celebrity wealth, for the results may just leave you pleasantly surprised and scratching your head in equal measure.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the relationship between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and Brad Pitt's net worth during the period 1987 to 2001 yields a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.8836227, indicating a strong positive relationship between the variables. This correlation is further supported by the r-squared value of 0.7807891, suggesting that approximately 78.1% of the variability in Brad Pitt's net worth can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Central City. The associated p-value, less than 0.01, reflects a high level of statistical significance, confirming the strength of the observed relationship.
The figure (Fig. 1) illustrates the scatterplot displaying the pronounced correlation between air pollution levels and Brad Pitt's net worth. The data points form a clear upward trend, highlighting the synchronous movements of these ostensibly dissimilar variables. As intriguing as it may seem, the findings underscore the unexpected interconnectedness between environmental factors and the financial fortunes of a Hollywood luminary.
The seemingly disparate realms of environmental science and celebrity economics collide in this statistical revelation, emphasizing the unanticipated, yet unequivocal association between air pollution and Brad Pitt's net worth. It serves as a poignant reminder that statistical investigations, much like Hollywood plotlines, can unfold in surprising, even whimsical ways, revealing unexpected relationships that prompt a raised eyebrow and, perhaps, a wry smile.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of the eyebrow-raising correlation between air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the undulating fortunes of an iconic Hollywood figure, Brad Pitt. The statistical analysis deftly captures the synchronicity between these ostensibly unrelated variables, reaffirming the bewildering interconnectedness of the world around us. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and the r-squared value of 0.7807891 not only underscore the surprising coherence between air quality and Mr. Pitt's financial standing but also serve as a testament to the whimsical nature of statistical revelations.

As we navigate this labyrinth of statistical exploration, we are reminded that even the most unlikely bedfellows can partake in an enchanting dance of correlation, much like a tango between variables with fluttering uncertainties and elegant confidence intervals. The scatterplot eloquently encapsulates this dalliance, painting a vivid picture of the harmonious duet between the ethereal dance of air pollution and the financial waltz of celebrity wealth.

However, the incongruity of these findings also beckons us to consider the elusive nature of causation, prompting a cautious pause before we promenade down the path of definitive conclusions. While the statistics speak volumes about the relationship between air pollution and Brad Pitt's net worth, the deeper underlying mechanisms remain shrouded in enigma, like an unsolved statistical riddle that begs for further exploration.

Nevertheless, with a nod to statistical serendipity and a chuckle at the unexpected intersections of research inquiry, we confidently declare that no further forays need to be made into this peculiar nexus of air pollution and celebrity affluence. For, in the whimsical words of Oscar Wilde, "The truth is rarely pure and never simple," and sometimes, it's best to leave the beguiling mysteries of statistical correlations untouched, lest we unravel the charm of their unexpected coherence.


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 The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Celebrity Economics and Environmental Health


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 The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Celebrity Environmental Economics


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 The Pitt and the Pollution: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Quality in Central City, Kentucky and Brad Pitt's Net Worth with an abstract of This study investigates the potentially unexpected and tangentially related variables of air pollution in Central City, Kentucky, and the fluctuations in Brad Pitt's net worth. Using data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and The Richest, we have conducted a thorough statistical analysis to explore the potential correlation between these seemingly disparate factors. The findings reveal a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8836227 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 1987 to 2001. Our study sheds light on the intricate web of interconnections within our world, illustrating that even the tiniest particles of air pollution can sneakily influence the financial standing of a Hollywood A-lister. This unexpected correlation raises questions and piques curiosity about potential hidden influences, reminding us that statistical investigations can sometimes lead to rather unconventional and amusing discoveries.

ChatGPT:

Central City Kentucky, air pollution, Brad Pitt, net worth, correlation analysis, Environmental Protection Agency, The Richest, statistical analysis, correlation coefficient, p-value, hidden influences

*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 Central City, Kentucky
Detailed data title: Percentage of days 'unhealthy' or worse air quality in Central City, KY
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky

Brad Pitt's net worth
Source: The Richest
See what else correlates with Brad Pitt's net worth

Correlation r = 0.8836227 (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 = 0.7807891 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 78.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Brad Pitt's net worth) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky) over the 15 years from 1987 through 2001.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.3E-5. 0.0000125354143126539980000000
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 0.0013% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 79,774 random variables You don't actually need 79 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 14 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 14 because we have two variables measured over a period of 15 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.

[ 0.68, 0.96 ] 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.
198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001
Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky (Bad air quality days)000000000000000.816326
Brad Pitt's net worth (US Dollars)380120000600005000000400000010000000180000001750000017500000057500000




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([0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.816326,])
array_2 = np.array([38,0,12000,0,6000,0,500000,0,4000000,10000000,18000000,17500000,17500000,0,57500000,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Central City, Kentucky"
array_2_name = "Brad Pitt's net worth"

# 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?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 3816 · Black Variable ID: 20424 · Red Variable ID: 544
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0