AI explanation
As the saying goes, everything's bigger in Texas - including the support for Libertarian ideals. This surge in Libertarian votes somehow created a butterfly effect that reached all the way to the serene mountains of Bhutan, inspiring their commitment to renewable energy. Who knew that Lone Star liberty could lead to a thunder dragon's passion for green power? It's a political paradox with a renewable twist!
Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [A photo-realistic image] In the heart of Texas, a scenic landscape emerges, with a towering ballot box overflowing with ballots casting votes for Libertarian senators. The box is illuminated by the vibrant Texan sun, casting a warm glow across the surrounding area. Meanwhile, amidst the lush valleys of Bhutan, a serene scene unfolds as sleek wind turbines and glistening solar panels are scattered across the landscape, capturing the sun's radiant energy. The Lone Star flag proudly waves alongside fluttering prayer flags, symbolizing the unexpected connection between Libertarian votes and Bhutan's commitment to renewable energy. 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: Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Cute 2D animation Steampunk An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Cubism A photo-realistic image
ChatGPT: A photo-realistic image
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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan, in the following situation: As the saying goes, everything's bigger in Texas - including the support for Libertarian ideals. This surge in Libertarian votes somehow created a butterfly effect that reached all the way to the serene mountains of Bhutan, inspiring their commitment to renewable energy. Who knew that Lone Star liberty could lead to a thunder dragon's passion for green power? It's a political paradox with a renewable twist!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the heart of Texas, a ballot box overflows with votes for Libertarian senators, while in the lush valleys of Bhutan, wind turbines and solar panels dot the landscape, spinning and glistening in the sun. The Lone Star flag waves proudly alongside fluttering prayer flags, symbolizing the unexpected link between Libertarian votes and Bhutan's dedication to renewable energy.
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: [ A photo-realistic image ] and depicting this scene: In the heart of Texas, a ballot box overflows with votes for Libertarian senators, while in the lush valleys of Bhutan, wind turbines and solar panels dot the landscape, spinning and glistening in the sun. The Lone Star flag waves proudly alongside fluttering prayer flags, symbolizing the unexpected link between Libertarian votes and Bhutan's dedication to renewable energy. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [A photo-realistic image] In the heart of Texas, a scenic landscape emerges, with a towering ballot box overflowing with ballots casting votes for Libertarian senators. The box is illuminated by the vibrant Texan sun, casting a warm glow across the surrounding area. Meanwhile, amidst the lush valleys of Bhutan, a serene scene unfolds as sleek wind turbines and glistening solar panels are scattered across the landscape, capturing the sun's radiant energy. The Lone Star flag proudly waves alongside fluttering prayer flags, symbolizing the unexpected connection between Libertarian votes and Bhutan's commitment to renewable energy.
*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.
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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas caused Renewable energy production in Bhutan to increase. Add a funny one-liner at the end.
AI academic paper
 |
Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore The Journal of Unusual Political Alliances Jan 2024 |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.
Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for 1982 to 2020.
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]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and environmental policy has long been a subject of interest and contention. As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change and sustainable energy production, understanding the factors that influence these critical domains becomes increasingly imperative. In this vein, our research delves into the unexpected marriage of Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. It's a pairing that seems as unlikely as a tumbleweed in a wind farm, yet our findings paint a compelling picture of their interdependence. It's as if the wind and laissez-faire principles have found a harmonious rhythm, much like a well-tuned wind turbine.
The Lone Star State of Texas has earned recognition for its robust wind energy infrastructure and its proponent of individual freedom and minimal government intervention, while Bhutan, the Land of the Thunder Dragon, has carved its identity as a leading proponent of renewable energy and carbon-negative policies. These two seemingly disparate entities are brought together in our study, highlighting the electrons and elephants of the green revolution. Speaking of elephants, why don't they use renewable energy sources in Bhutan? Because they prefer trunk fuel, of course! But the synergy between these geographic and political poles offers an intriguing lens through which to examine the tangled web of political affiliation and environmental action.
Our exploration draws upon extensive datasets from reputable sources, meticulously dissecting decades of voting patterns and energy production statistics. The robustness of our methodology provides a sturdy foundation for the analysis of this peculiar relationship. Much like the sturdy blades of a wind turbine, our statistical tools slice through the data with precision and rigor, revealing patterns that bring to light the surprising dance between political leanings and sustainable energy initiatives. It's like uncovering a gust of truth in a whirlwind of complexity.
As we venture further into this unique inquiry, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology are not just blowing in the direction of governance, but also synergizing with the currents of sustainable energy practices. These findings, although seemingly whimsical at first sight, carry profound implications for our understanding of the interconnectedness of human choices and environmental outcomes. It's almost like finding a hidden breeze in a Senate chamber – sometimes, the most unexpected alliances make the most compelling tunes.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and environmental policy has long been a subject of interest and contention. As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change and sustainable energy production, understanding the factors that influence these critical domains becomes increasingly imperative. In this vein, our research delves into the unexpected marriage of Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. It's a pairing that seems as unlikely as a tumbleweed in a wind farm, yet our findings paint a compelling picture of their interdependence. It's as if the wind and laissez-faire principles have found a harmonious rhythm, much like a well-tuned wind turbine.
The Lone Star State of Texas has earned recognition for its robust wind energy infrastructure and its proponent of individual freedom and minimal government intervention, while Bhutan, the Land of the Thunder Dragon, has carved its identity as a leading proponent of renewable energy and carbon-negative policies. These two seemingly disparate entities are brought together in our study, highlighting the electrons and elephants of the green revolution. Speaking of elephants, why don't they use renewable energy sources in Bhutan? Because they prefer trunk fuel, of course! But the synergy between these geographic and political poles offers an intriguing lens through which to examine the tangled web of political affiliation and environmental action.
Our exploration draws upon extensive datasets from reputable sources, meticulously dissecting decades of voting patterns and energy production statistics. The robustness of our methodology provides a sturdy foundation for the analysis of this peculiar relationship. Much like the sturdy blades of a wind turbine, our statistical tools slice through the data with precision and rigor, revealing patterns that bring to light the surprising dance between political leanings and sustainable energy initiatives. It's like uncovering a gust of truth in a whirlwind of complexity.
As we venture further into this unique inquiry, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology are not just blowing in the direction of governance, but also synergizing with the currents of sustainable energy practices. These findings, although seemingly whimsical at first sight, carry profound implications for our understanding of the interconnectedness of human choices and environmental outcomes. It's almost like finding a hidden breeze in a Senate chamber – sometimes, the most unexpected alliances make the most compelling tunes.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2015) explored the political landscape of Texas and its implications for energy policies. Their study shed light on the intricate dynamics of political ideologies and their influence on renewable energy initiatives. Meanwhile, Doe and Jones (2017) delved into the factors shaping environmental sustainability in Bhutan, highlighting the nation's ambitious strides in carbon negativity and renewable energy production. These serious and meticulously conducted studies set the stage for our investigation into the unexpected synergy between Libertarian votes in Texas and renewable energy ventures in Bhutan. Speaking of synergy, why did the Libertarian refuse to use wind energy? Because it all just felt like hot air to them!
In "The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels," Alex Epstein challenges conventional thinking on energy and the environment, provoking debate on the balance between human flourishing and ecological concerns. This thought-provoking work prompts us to reconsider the ideological underpinnings of energy debates and their ramifications. On the other hand, "This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate" by Naomi Klein provides a compelling exploration of the intersections between political economy and environmental imperatives. These books serve as foundational pillars in our quest to tease out the curious relationship between political allegiance and green power. Did you hear about the libertarian who took a solar panel to a political rally? He was hoping for some light refreshments!
Turning to fictional works, the dystopian visions of a world ravaged by environmental deterioration in Margaret Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" and Paolo Bacigalupi's "The Windup Girl" invite contemplation on the consequences of political choices in shaping ecological destinies. Likewise, the cinematic portrayal of alternative energy pursuits in "The Day After Tomorrow" and "The Lorax" infuse our discourse with imaginative lenses through which to view the complex interplay of political leanings and environmental imperatives. Watching those films was quite the whirlwind experience!
As we navigate this landscape of scholarly and imaginative discourse, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology and renewable energy production intersect in unexpected and whimsical ways, much like a political windsock spinning unpredictably in a gust of competing influences. These unexpected alignments, though seemingly lighthearted, compel a serious reconsideration of the intricate dance between political choices and environmental consequences. It's like finding a gust of truth blowing through the hallowed halls of political discourse – sometimes, the unlikeliest pairings yield the most illuminating revelations.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1982 to 2020
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]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and environmental policy has long been a subject of interest and contention. As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change and sustainable energy production, understanding the factors that influence these critical domains becomes increasingly imperative. In this vein, our research delves into the unexpected marriage of Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. It's a pairing that seems as unlikely as a tumbleweed in a wind farm, yet our findings paint a compelling picture of their interdependence. It's as if the wind and laissez-faire principles have found a harmonious rhythm, much like a well-tuned wind turbine.
The Lone Star State of Texas has earned recognition for its robust wind energy infrastructure and its proponent of individual freedom and minimal government intervention, while Bhutan, the Land of the Thunder Dragon, has carved its identity as a leading proponent of renewable energy and carbon-negative policies. These two seemingly disparate entities are brought together in our study, highlighting the electrons and elephants of the green revolution. Speaking of elephants, why don't they use renewable energy sources in Bhutan? Because they prefer trunk fuel, of course! But the synergy between these geographic and political poles offers an intriguing lens through which to examine the tangled web of political affiliation and environmental action.
Our exploration draws upon extensive datasets from reputable sources, meticulously dissecting decades of voting patterns and energy production statistics. The robustness of our methodology provides a sturdy foundation for the analysis of this peculiar relationship. Much like the sturdy blades of a wind turbine, our statistical tools slice through the data with precision and rigor, revealing patterns that bring to light the surprising dance between political leanings and sustainable energy initiatives. It's like uncovering a gust of truth in a whirlwind of complexity.
As we venture further into this unique inquiry, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology are not just blowing in the direction of governance, but also synergizing with the currents of sustainable energy practices. These findings, although seemingly whimsical at first sight, carry profound implications for our understanding of the interconnectedness of human choices and environmental outcomes. It's almost like finding a hidden breeze in a Senate chamber – sometimes, the most unexpected alliances make the most compelling tunes.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
To explore the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan, we employed a comprehensive and multi-faceted methodology. Our data collection and analysis process can be likened to the complexity of untangling a mess of windblown wires – a task that requires patience, precision, and a good sense of humor. Speaking of windblown wires, have you heard about the libertarian who tried to go with the flow and ended up caught in a whirlwind of puns? He's now known as the "wind-bag" of wit and whimsy in political circles.
Data Sources:
We collected data from a variety of reputable sources, including the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration. Our team scoured the depths of cyberspace, navigating through vast digital fields much like adventurers in search of the elusive wind currents. It's almost like trying to find a needle in a haystack – if the needle was made of electrons and the haystack was a vast expanse of digital data.
Statistical Analysis:
Our statistical analysis involved a sophisticated blend of correlation analysis, regression modeling, and time-series forecasting. Picture this – it's as if we're riding the statistical winds, navigating through swirling data patterns to uncover the hidden connections between political preferences and renewable energy outputs. Every statistical model and regression equation we constructed was akin to weaving a proverbial windsock of data, capturing the gusts and breezes of electoral choices and sustainable energy production.
Temporal Considerations:
The temporal aspects of our analysis spanned from 1982 to 2020, encompassing a significant period of political and environmental developments. Like seasoned temporal detectives, we combed through decades of data, piecing together the historical puzzle of libertarian votes and renewable energy endeavors. It's a bit like being time travelers in search of the elusive threads of causality, unraveling the fabric of temporal influence on political decision-making and energy policies.
Cross-Referencing and Validation:
To ensure the robustness of our findings, we cross-referenced and validated our results across multiple datasets and time periods. This process of cross-referencing was akin to aligning complementary wind directions, making sure that our findings harmonized across different sources and temporal snapshots. It's almost like finding the perfect balance of zephyrs and gales within the whirlwind of data – a delicate dance of validation and verification.
Limitations:
Naturally, our study was not without limitations. It's as if we were navigating through a field of wind turbines with occasional periods of calm – the journey was not devoid of challenges. The limitations primarily revolved around the availability and granularity of data, as well as the intricacies of disentangling the multifaceted influences on political and environmental dynamics. It's like trying to catch every gust of political change and every shift in renewable energy policies – there are moments when the winds of data are elusive.
Overall, our methodology encapsulates a rigorous and innovative approach to unraveling the unexpected bond between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. It's like charting new territories of statistical exploration, fusing the winds of political ideology with the currents of environmental action. As we embark on this unique intellectual journey, it's clear that the wind of discovery carries us toward uncharted domains of insight and interconnectedness. Let's hope that our findings blow away any lingering doubts about the intricate relationship between political choices and sustainable energy futures.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration .
For the time period 1982 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8544452, r-squared of 0.7300767, 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]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of political ideology and environmental policy has long been a subject of interest and contention. As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change and sustainable energy production, understanding the factors that influence these critical domains becomes increasingly imperative. In this vein, our research delves into the unexpected marriage of Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. It's a pairing that seems as unlikely as a tumbleweed in a wind farm, yet our findings paint a compelling picture of their interdependence. It's as if the wind and laissez-faire principles have found a harmonious rhythm, much like a well-tuned wind turbine.
The Lone Star State of Texas has earned recognition for its robust wind energy infrastructure and its proponent of individual freedom and minimal government intervention, while Bhutan, the Land of the Thunder Dragon, has carved its identity as a leading proponent of renewable energy and carbon-negative policies. These two seemingly disparate entities are brought together in our study, highlighting the electrons and elephants of the green revolution. Speaking of elephants, why don't they use renewable energy sources in Bhutan? Because they prefer trunk fuel, of course! But the synergy between these geographic and political poles offers an intriguing lens through which to examine the tangled web of political affiliation and environmental action.
Our exploration draws upon extensive datasets from reputable sources, meticulously dissecting decades of voting patterns and energy production statistics. The robustness of our methodology provides a sturdy foundation for the analysis of this peculiar relationship. Much like the sturdy blades of a wind turbine, our statistical tools slice through the data with precision and rigor, revealing patterns that bring to light the surprising dance between political leanings and sustainable energy initiatives. It's like uncovering a gust of truth in a whirlwind of complexity.
As we venture further into this unique inquiry, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology are not just blowing in the direction of governance, but also synergizing with the currents of sustainable energy practices. These findings, although seemingly whimsical at first sight, carry profound implications for our understanding of the interconnectedness of human choices and environmental outcomes. It's almost like finding a hidden breeze in a Senate chamber – sometimes, the most unexpected alliances make the most compelling tunes.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration revealed a significant correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Specifically, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.8544452, denoting a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This correlation was further substantiated by an r-squared value of 0.7300767, indicating that approximately 73% of the variability in renewable energy production in Bhutan can be explained by the Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas. In statistical terms, this relationship exceeded conventional significance levels, with a p-value of less than 0.01.
Figure 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. The data points conform to a clear trend, emphasizing the striking concordance that our analysis has uncovered. It's like discovering a gust of unity in the political and environmental arenas, blowing away any doubts about the link between these two phenomena. Speaking of unity, have you heard about the wind turbine's campaign slogan? "Let's all come together and make some wind energy!"
These findings deepen our understanding of the intricate interplay between political preferences and environmental outcomes. The unexpected harmony between the Lone Star State and the Land of the Thunder Dragon reflects an alliance as unique and powerful as the wind's embrace of the turbine blades. As we wrap up our analysis, we leave no gust unturned, emphasizing the significance of these unanticipated connections and the potential they hold for shaping sustainable policies and political discourse. It's as if the winds of change aren't just whispers in the air, but tangible forces shaping the landscape of environmental action.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2015) explored the political landscape of Texas and its implications for energy policies. Their study shed light on the intricate dynamics of political ideologies and their influence on renewable energy initiatives. Meanwhile, Doe and Jones (2017) delved into the factors shaping environmental sustainability in Bhutan, highlighting the nation's ambitious strides in carbon negativity and renewable energy production. These serious and meticulously conducted studies set the stage for our investigation into the unexpected synergy between Libertarian votes in Texas and renewable energy ventures in Bhutan. Speaking of synergy, why did the Libertarian refuse to use wind energy? Because it all just felt like hot air to them!
In "The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels," Alex Epstein challenges conventional thinking on energy and the environment, provoking debate on the balance between human flourishing and ecological concerns. This thought-provoking work prompts us to reconsider the ideological underpinnings of energy debates and their ramifications. On the other hand, "This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate" by Naomi Klein provides a compelling exploration of the intersections between political economy and environmental imperatives. These books serve as foundational pillars in our quest to tease out the curious relationship between political allegiance and green power. Did you hear about the libertarian who took a solar panel to a political rally? He was hoping for some light refreshments!
Turning to fictional works, the dystopian visions of a world ravaged by environmental deterioration in Margaret Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" and Paolo Bacigalupi's "The Windup Girl" invite contemplation on the consequences of political choices in shaping ecological destinies. Likewise, the cinematic portrayal of alternative energy pursuits in "The Day After Tomorrow" and "The Lorax" infuse our discourse with imaginative lenses through which to view the complex interplay of political leanings and environmental imperatives. Watching those films was quite the whirlwind experience!
As we navigate this landscape of scholarly and imaginative discourse, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology and renewable energy production intersect in unexpected and whimsical ways, much like a political windsock spinning unpredictably in a gust of competing influences. These unexpected alignments, though seemingly lighthearted, compel a serious reconsideration of the intricate dance between political choices and environmental consequences. It's like finding a gust of truth blowing through the hallowed halls of political discourse – sometimes, the unlikeliest pairings yield the most illuminating revelations.
[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration revealed a significant correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Specifically, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.8544452, denoting a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This correlation was further substantiated by an r-squared value of 0.7300767, indicating that approximately 73% of the variability in renewable energy production in Bhutan can be explained by the Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas. In statistical terms, this relationship exceeded conventional significance levels, with a p-value of less than 0.01.
Figure 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. The data points conform to a clear trend, emphasizing the striking concordance that our analysis has uncovered. It's like discovering a gust of unity in the political and environmental arenas, blowing away any doubts about the link between these two phenomena. Speaking of unity, have you heard about the wind turbine's campaign slogan? "Let's all come together and make some wind energy!"
These findings deepen our understanding of the intricate interplay between political preferences and environmental outcomes. The unexpected harmony between the Lone Star State and the Land of the Thunder Dragon reflects an alliance as unique and powerful as the wind's embrace of the turbine blades. As we wrap up our analysis, we leave no gust unturned, emphasizing the significance of these unanticipated connections and the potential they hold for shaping sustainable policies and political discourse. It's as if the winds of change aren't just whispers in the air, but tangible forces shaping the landscape of environmental action.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
Our findings present a formidable correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan, offering compelling evidence of the unanticipated alignment between political leanings and environmental initiatives. The impressive correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and the r-squared value of 0.7300767 not only validate the prior research by Smith et al. (2015) on political ideologies and energy policies but also lend support to Doe and Jones' (2017) exploration of environmental sustainability in Bhutan. These results underscore the capacity of political forces to reverberate across geographical boundaries, much like the far-reaching impact of a gust of wind. It's like finding a tailwind in the pursuit of understanding the intricate interplay between political choices and sustainable energy endeavors.
The robust statistical association we observed complements the thought-provoking inquiries of Alex Epstein and Naomi Klein on the ideological underpinnings of energy debates and the implications for ecological imperatives. Our results echo the challenge posed by Epstein to rethink the balance between human flourishing and environmental concerns, as well as the thought-provoking exploration by Klein in connecting political economy with environmental imperatives. Our analysis not only corroborates these pivotal works but also contributes a new dimension to the discourse by depicting how political choices can manifest tangibly in environmental outcomes. It's as if the winds of political ideology, buoyed by the ardent ambitions of Bhutan, have converged to create a force for sustainable change.
The breadth of our discussion extends beyond the realm of scholarly discourse, touching upon fictional narratives that contemplate the consequences of political choices in shaping ecological destinies. Margaret Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" and Paolo Bacigalupi's "The Windup Girl" offer imaginative lenses through which to view the complex interplay of political leanings and environmental imperatives. Similarly, the cinematic portrayal of alternative energy pursuits in "The Day After Tomorrow" and "The Lorax" mirrors our findings in highlighting the intricate dance between political choices and environmental consequences. It's like catching a breeze of understanding in the whirlwind of imagination, where the unexpected yet thought-provoking alignments yield the most illuminating revelations.
As we reflect on the unexpected harmony between the Lone Star State and the Land of the Thunder Dragon, we are reminded of the power of unity in championing sustainable policies and environmental action. Our results serve as a clarion call to embrace the unforeseen connections and potential implications they hold for shaping the discourse on environmental sustainability. The alliance we have unearthed is as unique and formidable as the wind's embrace of the turbine blades, ushering in a new era of interdisciplinary inquiry at the nexus of political choices and environmental consequences. It's as if the winds of change aren't just whispers in the air, but tangible forces shaping the landscape of environmental action.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and Renewable energy production in Bhutan. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore"
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and environmental policy has long been a subject of interest and contention. As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change and sustainable energy production, understanding the factors that influence these critical domains becomes increasingly imperative. In this vein, our research delves into the unexpected marriage of Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. It's a pairing that seems as unlikely as a tumbleweed in a wind farm, yet our findings paint a compelling picture of their interdependence. It's as if the wind and laissez-faire principles have found a harmonious rhythm, much like a well-tuned wind turbine.
The Lone Star State of Texas has earned recognition for its robust wind energy infrastructure and its proponent of individual freedom and minimal government intervention, while Bhutan, the Land of the Thunder Dragon, has carved its identity as a leading proponent of renewable energy and carbon-negative policies. These two seemingly disparate entities are brought together in our study, highlighting the electrons and elephants of the green revolution. Speaking of elephants, why don't they use renewable energy sources in Bhutan? Because they prefer trunk fuel, of course! But the synergy between these geographic and political poles offers an intriguing lens through which to examine the tangled web of political affiliation and environmental action.
Our exploration draws upon extensive datasets from reputable sources, meticulously dissecting decades of voting patterns and energy production statistics. The robustness of our methodology provides a sturdy foundation for the analysis of this peculiar relationship. Much like the sturdy blades of a wind turbine, our statistical tools slice through the data with precision and rigor, revealing patterns that bring to light the surprising dance between political leanings and sustainable energy initiatives. It's like uncovering a gust of truth in a whirlwind of complexity.
As we venture further into this unique inquiry, it becomes evident that the winds of political ideology are not just blowing in the direction of governance, but also synergizing with the currents of sustainable energy practices. These findings, although seemingly whimsical at first sight, carry profound implications for our understanding of the interconnectedness of human choices and environmental outcomes. It's almost like finding a hidden breeze in a Senate chamber – sometimes, the most unexpected alliances make the most compelling tunes.
[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration revealed a significant correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Specifically, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.8544452, denoting a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This correlation was further substantiated by an r-squared value of 0.7300767, indicating that approximately 73% of the variability in renewable energy production in Bhutan can be explained by the Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas. In statistical terms, this relationship exceeded conventional significance levels, with a p-value of less than 0.01.
Figure 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. The data points conform to a clear trend, emphasizing the striking concordance that our analysis has uncovered. It's like discovering a gust of unity in the political and environmental arenas, blowing away any doubts about the link between these two phenomena. Speaking of unity, have you heard about the wind turbine's campaign slogan? "Let's all come together and make some wind energy!"
These findings deepen our understanding of the intricate interplay between political preferences and environmental outcomes. The unexpected harmony between the Lone Star State and the Land of the Thunder Dragon reflects an alliance as unique and powerful as the wind's embrace of the turbine blades. As we wrap up our analysis, we leave no gust unturned, emphasizing the significance of these unanticipated connections and the potential they hold for shaping sustainable policies and political discourse. It's as if the winds of change aren't just whispers in the air, but tangible forces shaping the landscape of environmental action.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our research has unveiled a compelling relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. The significant correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and a p-value of less than 0.01 have propelled these seemingly distant entities into a harmonious alliance, not unlike a Texan line dance with Bhutanese folk music. This unexpected correlation challenges conventional wisdom and invites a reevaluation of the intricate dance between political choices and environmental outcomes. It's as if the winds of change are pulling these distinct regions into a surprising waltz of sustainability.
Our findings have broader implications, demonstrating the pivotal role of political leanings in shaping environmental initiatives. This partnership between Texas and Bhutan showcases the power of collaboration in driving sustainable policies, reminding us that even in the expansive realm of global politics and environmental action, every vote and watt count. It's like discovering a treasure trove of renewable energy amidst the vast plains of political discourse - a valuable revelation that illuminates the potential for cooperative strategies in addressing environmental challenges.
On a lighter note, it seems that our research has blown away any doubts about the interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena - much like a wind turbine effortlessly dispersing clouds of skepticism. The synergy between Libertarian votes and renewable energy production is a breath of fresh air in the sometimes stuffy corridors of academic inquiry. This unexpected relationship, much like a sudden gust of wind, demands attention and provides fertile ground for future explorations.
Speaking of attention, it appears that the winds of change have spoken, and the results of our study warrant our utmost endorsement. Our analysis concludes that no further research is needed in this area. After all, when the wind blows, why chase after what has already been uncovered?
No more research is needed in this area - we've already harnessed the power of this unexpected connection and blown the lid off conventional wisdom. It's time to let these findings set sail, much like a wind turbine catching the breeze of innovation.
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 Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Unusual Political Alliances
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 Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Association for Ethereal Wind 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 Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore with an abstract of In this study, we investigate the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas and renewable energy production in Bhutan. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Energy Information Administration, we aimed to untangle the mysterious connection between political leanings and environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8544452 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1982 to 2020. As we embark on this journey of statistical exploration, we unravel the unexpected ties between seemingly disparate entities, much like trying to connect wind turbines with laissez-faire ideology. Speaking of wind, did you hear about the wind turbine that became a stand-up comedian? It had the whole crowd in stitches! Our results not only shed light on the interplay between political choices and sustainable energy efforts but also inject a bit of humor into the typically serious realm of academic research.
ChatGPT:
Libertarian, Senator votes, Texas, renewable energy, Bhutan, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, political leanings, environmental initiatives, statistical exploration, wind turbines, sustainable energy efforts
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Libertarian votes for Senators in TexasDetailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Libertarian Senate candidates in Texas
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas
Renewable energy production in Bhutan
Detailed data title: Total renewable energy production in Bhutan in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Renewable energy production in Bhutan
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 = 0.7300767 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 73% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Renewable energy production in Bhutan) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas) over the 13 years from 1982 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0002. 0.0001994544490617040300000000
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 0.85 in 0.02% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 5,014 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 12 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 12 because we have two variables measured over a period of 13 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.
[ 0.57, 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.
| 1982 | 1988 | 1990 | 1994 | 1996 | 2000 | 2002 | 2006 | 2008 | 2012 | 2014 | 2018 | 2020 | |
| Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas (Total votes) | 23494 | 43989 | 89089 | 36107 | 51516 | 72657 | 35538 | 97672 | 185241 | 162354 | 133751 | 65470 | 209722 |
| Renewable energy production in Bhutan (Billion kWh) | 0.008 | 1.529 | 1.541 | 1.658 | 1.852 | 1.792 | 2.178 | 4.474 | 6.891 | 6.745 | 7.15 | 6.89 | 8.951 |
Why this works
- 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.
- 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. - 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. - Confounding variable: 2020 is particularly different from the other years on this graph. Confounding variables (like global pandemics) will cause two variables to look connected when in fact a "sneaky third" variable is influencing both of them behind the scenes.
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([23494,43989,89089,36107,51516,72657,35538,97672,185241,162354,133751,65470,209722,])
array_2 = np.array([0.008,1.529,1.541,1.658,1.852,1.792,2.178,4.474,6.891,6.745,7.15,6.89,8.951,])
array_1_name = "Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas"
array_2_name = "Renewable energy production in Bhutan"
# 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:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Libertarian votes for Senators in Texas
- Line chart for only Renewable energy production in Bhutan
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Wind and Libertarians: A Tandem Too Tempting to Ignore
I'm grateful for your review!
Correlation ID: 4323 · Black Variable ID: 26319 · Red Variable ID: 23521
