about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,481 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and the second variable is Fossil fuel use in Honduras.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the support for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia grew, so did the enthusiasm for traditional values. This inadvertently led to a resurgence of interest in old-school practices, including the use of fossil fuels. The ideological alignment sparked a chain reaction of energy consumption, creating a surprising link between the American political landscape and the fossil fuel habits in a Central American country. Who would've thought that a political race could fuel change thousands of miles away? It's a gas!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ A scene from Skyrim ] Create an image of a majestic medieval castle built upon a towering mountain. At the base of the mountain, a bustling town thrives, filled with merchants, craftsmen, and knights. The town square is adorned with colorful banners celebrating the bravery of the castle's defenders. People gather there, engaged in lively discussions about the kingdom's history and traditions. In the distance, a line of horse-drawn carriages and armored warriors can be seen, adding to the vibrant atmosphere. Meanwhile, a group of farmers in the nearby fields harness the power of ancient magic to cultivate their crops, merging tradition with innovation. The scene captures the harmony between the town's traditional values and the kingdom's advancement, showcasing a rich and bustling world. 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: Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. 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: High-tech Symbolism Cyberpunk inspired by bauhaus A scene from Skyrim
ChatGPT: A scene from Skyrim

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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras, in the following situation: As the support for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia grew, so did the enthusiasm for traditional values. This inadvertently led to a resurgence of interest in old-school practices, including the use of fossil fuels. The ideological alignment sparked a chain reaction of energy consumption, creating a surprising link between the American political landscape and the fossil fuel habits in a Central American country. Who would've thought that a political race could fuel change thousands of miles away? It's a gas!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: An image emerges of a crowded town square in Georgia, adorned with banners and signs supporting the Republican Presidential candidate. People are gathered, enthusiastically discussing traditional values. In the background, a line of vintage cars and trucks can be seen, emitting exhaust as they rev their engines. Meanwhile, in Honduras, a group of people are using fossil fuel-powered machinery to work in the fields, echoing the enthusiasm for traditional practices. The scene captures the surprising link between the political fervor in Georgia and the increased use of fossil fuels in Honduras, creating an unexpected connection through energy consumption.

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 scene from Skyrim ] and depicting this scene: An image emerges of a crowded town square in Georgia, adorned with banners and signs supporting the Republican Presidential candidate. People are gathered, enthusiastically discussing traditional values. In the background, a line of vintage cars and trucks can be seen, emitting exhaust as they rev their engines. Meanwhile, in Honduras, a group of people are using fossil fuel-powered machinery to work in the fields, echoing the enthusiasm for traditional practices. The scene captures the surprising link between the political fervor in Georgia and the increased use of fossil fuels in Honduras, creating an unexpected connection through energy consumption. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ A scene from Skyrim ] Create an image of a majestic medieval castle built upon a towering mountain. At the base of the mountain, a bustling town thrives, filled with merchants, craftsmen, and knights. The town square is adorned with colorful banners celebrating the bravery of the castle's defenders. People gather there, engaged in lively discussions about the kingdom's history and traditions. In the distance, a line of horse-drawn carriages and armored warriors can be seen, adding to the vibrant atmosphere. Meanwhile, a group of farmers in the nearby fields harness the power of ancient magic to cultivate their crops, merging tradition with innovation. The scene captures the harmony between the town's traditional values and the kingdom's advancement, showcasing a rich and bustling world.

*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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia caused Fossil fuel use in Honduras to increase. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras

The Journal of Environmental Entanglements

Jan 2024

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




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for 1980 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]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
As we embark on this peculiar journey into the world of political voting patterns and environmental impact, we find ourselves at the intriguing crossroads of Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras. This seemingly bizarre connection has piqued our curiosity and compelled us to delve deeper into the realms of statistical analysis and geopolitical implications. What do Republican presidential candidate votes in the Peach State have to do with the consumption of fossil fuels in the tropical paradise of Honduras? As we traverse this uncharted territory, we are reminded of a quote often attributed to renowned physicist Albert Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible." Indeed, dear reader, the quirky correlations we uncover in this study may just leave us scratching our heads in disbelief!

Now, before you roll your eyes and dismiss this paper as a farcical attempt to draw connections where none exist, let us assure you that our approach is deeply rooted in rigorous research methodologies. It is not every day that one gets to uncover statistical patterns that raise eyebrows, prompt chuckles, and perhaps even inspire a "Eureka!" moment. Our endeavor aims not only to unravel the data-driven tale of Republican fervor in Georgia and the fossil-fueled happenings in Honduras but also to inject a hearty dose of levity into the usually somber world of academic inquiry.

As the old adage goes, "When life gives you data, make statistics." And armed with data from reputable sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we have crafted a whimsical odyssey of analysis and interpretation. So, dear reader, buckle up and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the world of numbers, political inclinations, and environmental quirkiness. Together, let us savor the delightful irony of this scholarly expedition as we uncover the surprising connections between the red and the green!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we embark on this peculiar journey into the world of political voting patterns and environmental impact, we find ourselves at the intriguing crossroads of Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras. This seemingly bizarre connection has piqued our curiosity and compelled us to delve deeper into the realms of statistical analysis and geopolitical implications. What do Republican presidential candidate votes in the Peach State have to do with the consumption of fossil fuels in the tropical paradise of Honduras? As we traverse this uncharted territory, we are reminded of a quote often attributed to renowned physicist Albert Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible." Indeed, dear reader, the quirky correlations we uncover in this study may just leave us scratching our heads in disbelief!
Now, before you roll your eyes and dismiss this paper as a farcical attempt to draw connections where none exist, let us assure you that our approach is deeply rooted in rigorous research methodologies. It is not every day that one gets to uncover statistical patterns that raise eyebrows, prompt chuckles, and perhaps even inspire a "Eureka!" moment. Our endeavor aims not only to unravel the data-driven tale of Republican fervor in Georgia and the fossil-fueled happenings in Honduras but also to inject a hearty dose of levity into the usually somber world of academic inquiry.
As the old adage goes, "When life gives you data, make statistics." And armed with data from reputable sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we have crafted a whimsical odyssey of analysis and interpretation. So, dear reader, buckle up and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the world of numbers, political inclinations, and environmental quirkiness. Together, let us savor the delightful irony of this scholarly expedition as we uncover the surprising connections between the red and the green!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith et al. (2017) conducted a comprehensive analysis of statewide voting patterns in the United States, focusing particularly on the dynamics of Republican votes in Georgia. Their study, "Political Elucidations: A Quantitative Analysis of Georgia Political Trends," provides valuable insights into the historical shifts and patterns of political allegiance in the region. However, as we delve into the realm of fossil fuel consumption, one cannot help but ponder the curious intertwining of energy habits in far-flung Honduras.

Doe (2015) discusses the ecological impacts of fossil fuel consumption in Central America in their publication "Green in the Tropics: Exploring Energy Practices Amidst Lush Landscapes." The juxtaposition of this work with the political landscape in Georgia is indeed a curious venture, but in the spirit of unearthing the unexpected, we shall continue to illuminate this unlikely connection.

Jones (2019) offers an insightful analysis of energy geopolitics in their article "Fuel Diplomacy: Navigating Energy Dependencies and Security." Though not directly linked to our specific research inquiry, this work serves as a reminder of the intricate web of energy interconnections that stretch across continents. Our journey to uncover the correlation between Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras may seem whimsical, but as we shall soon reveal, it is not without its amusing revelations.

In "The Omniscient Power of Petroleum" by Dr. Slick Rick (2020), the author makes a compelling case for the omnipresence of petroleum in shaping global dynamics, from politics to international relations. While Dr. Slick Rick's work may not explicitly touch upon the subject of political voting patterns, it does serve as a reminder of the pervasive influence of fossil fuels in our world.

Shifting from non-fiction to the realm of fiction, the works of Michael Crude and Coalio García Marquez offer imaginative retellings of individuals and societies entangled in the throes of fossil fuel fascination. Perhaps there is more to be gleaned from these fictional accounts than meets the eye.

Moreover, while perusing social media platforms, we stumbled upon a seemingly innocuous tweet from @EcoEnigma87: "The GOP in Georgia may have their eyes on the political prize, but are they blind to the environmental ties that bind?" While online musings must be approached with caution, this particular sentiment prompts an intriguing avenue of reflection.

As we wade through this mélange of academic literature, fiction, and social media snippets, we cannot help but acknowledge the delightful absurdity of our pursuit. Yet, it is in these unexpected juxtapositions and humorous contemplations that we unearth the essence of our scholarly quest.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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 1980 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]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we embark on this peculiar journey into the world of political voting patterns and environmental impact, we find ourselves at the intriguing crossroads of Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras. This seemingly bizarre connection has piqued our curiosity and compelled us to delve deeper into the realms of statistical analysis and geopolitical implications. What do Republican presidential candidate votes in the Peach State have to do with the consumption of fossil fuels in the tropical paradise of Honduras? As we traverse this uncharted territory, we are reminded of a quote often attributed to renowned physicist Albert Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible." Indeed, dear reader, the quirky correlations we uncover in this study may just leave us scratching our heads in disbelief!
Now, before you roll your eyes and dismiss this paper as a farcical attempt to draw connections where none exist, let us assure you that our approach is deeply rooted in rigorous research methodologies. It is not every day that one gets to uncover statistical patterns that raise eyebrows, prompt chuckles, and perhaps even inspire a "Eureka!" moment. Our endeavor aims not only to unravel the data-driven tale of Republican fervor in Georgia and the fossil-fueled happenings in Honduras but also to inject a hearty dose of levity into the usually somber world of academic inquiry.
As the old adage goes, "When life gives you data, make statistics." And armed with data from reputable sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we have crafted a whimsical odyssey of analysis and interpretation. So, dear reader, buckle up and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the world of numbers, political inclinations, and environmental quirkiness. Together, let us savor the delightful irony of this scholarly expedition as we uncover the surprising connections between the red and the green!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

Given the unorthodox nature of our research focus, our methodology required a blend of traditional statistical analysis and a sprinkle of whimsy. Our approach rested on the bedrock of meticulous data collection, thorough data cleaning, and innovative research techniques that may have elicited a chuckle or two from even the most stoic academics.

To commence our expedition into the world of data correlation, we scoured numerous esteemed sources, including the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration. Delving deep into the annals of internet repositories, we spared no effort in collecting data ranging from the year 1980 to 2020. Like intrepid explorers in the digital wilderness, we braved the temptations of online distractions and the siren call of cute cat videos to gather the treasure trove of datasets necessary for our investigation.

The initial phase of our methodology involved the purification of our raw data. In a process akin to separating the wheat from the chaff, we meticulously sifted through the datasets, discarding any outliers, errors, or dubious entries that threatened to muddy the waters of our analysis. This purgative stage may not have involved chanting incantations or sacrificing a calculator, but it certainly had an air of mystical precision about it.

With our data scrubbed and polished to a high gleam, we then marched forth into the realm of statistical analysis. Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools and a metaphorical compass to steer us through the labyrinth of numbers, we conducted a rigorous examination of the relationship between GOP votes in Georgia and fossil fuel use in Honduras. Our methodologies included a medley of regression analyses, scatter plots with trend lines, and the occasional interpretive dance to summon insights from the data.

Moreover, we harnessed the power of advanced statistical software, some of which were so sophisticated that they could almost be mistaken for magic wands wielded by modern-day sorcerers. These tools allowed us to conjure up statistical tests, manipulate variables with the dexterity of a master illusionist, and produce visualizations that would make even the most seasoned data analyst raise an impressed eyebrow.

To ensure the robustness and reliability of our findings, we subjected our analyses to a battery of sensitivity tests and robustness checks, akin to stress-testing a playful theory to ensure its resilience against the winds of skepticism. This rigorous approach, accompanied by a touch of scholarly jest, underpinned our unveiling of the unexpected correlation between Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras.

In summary, our methodology combined the rigors of traditional statistical analysis with a healthy dose of playful innovation, akin to navigating a labyrinth with a treasure map and an occasional detour to chase after a charming statistical outlier.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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 1980 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9782002, r-squared of 0.9568756, 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]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As we embark on this peculiar journey into the world of political voting patterns and environmental impact, we find ourselves at the intriguing crossroads of Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras. This seemingly bizarre connection has piqued our curiosity and compelled us to delve deeper into the realms of statistical analysis and geopolitical implications. What do Republican presidential candidate votes in the Peach State have to do with the consumption of fossil fuels in the tropical paradise of Honduras? As we traverse this uncharted territory, we are reminded of a quote often attributed to renowned physicist Albert Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible." Indeed, dear reader, the quirky correlations we uncover in this study may just leave us scratching our heads in disbelief!
Now, before you roll your eyes and dismiss this paper as a farcical attempt to draw connections where none exist, let us assure you that our approach is deeply rooted in rigorous research methodologies. It is not every day that one gets to uncover statistical patterns that raise eyebrows, prompt chuckles, and perhaps even inspire a "Eureka!" moment. Our endeavor aims not only to unravel the data-driven tale of Republican fervor in Georgia and the fossil-fueled happenings in Honduras but also to inject a hearty dose of levity into the usually somber world of academic inquiry.
As the old adage goes, "When life gives you data, make statistics." And armed with data from reputable sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we have crafted a whimsical odyssey of analysis and interpretation. So, dear reader, buckle up and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the world of numbers, political inclinations, and environmental quirkiness. Together, let us savor the delightful irony of this scholarly expedition as we uncover the surprising connections between the red and the green!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our foray into the land of statistical analysis has unearthed a startling correlation between Republican presidential candidate votes in Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. The correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and an r-squared value of 0.9568756 for the years 1980 to 2020 leave little room for doubt about the robustness of this unexpected relationship. With a p-value less than 0.01, the probability of this association occurring by mere chance is about as likely as discovering a fossilized Tyrannosaurus rex sipping a mojito on a Honduran beach.

Fig. 1 showcases the visually compelling scatterplot that vividly presents this remarkable correlation. The data points hug the trendline so closely that one might mistake them for enthusiastic attendees at a partisan rally.

This enigmatic link between Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras may seem as peculiar as a hamster riding a unicycle, but the statistical evidence speaks for itself. It reminds us that in the colorful tapestry of data, the most surprising threads can often weave a story worth unraveling.

The significance of this correlation goes beyond the mere numbers. It prompts us to pause and reflect on the interconnectedness of global phenomena, and it leaves us marveling at the intricate dance of geopolitical and environmental forces. Who would have thought that political inclinations in the Southeastern United States could hold sway over energy practices in a small Central American nation?

As we unpack the implications of this correlation, we are reminded that academia need not always be a staid, humorless endeavor. Sometimes, the most thought-provoking revelations are accompanied by a good-natured chuckle or a raised eyebrow. In the spirit of good-humored inquiry, we invite our readers to join us in celebrating the delightful absurdity of this statistical saga. After all, who says research papers can't have a touch of whimsy?


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2017) conducted a comprehensive analysis of statewide voting patterns in the United States, focusing particularly on the dynamics of Republican votes in Georgia. Their study, "Political Elucidations: A Quantitative Analysis of Georgia Political Trends," provides valuable insights into the historical shifts and patterns of political allegiance in the region. However, as we delve into the realm of fossil fuel consumption, one cannot help but ponder the curious intertwining of energy habits in far-flung Honduras.
Doe (2015) discusses the ecological impacts of fossil fuel consumption in Central America in their publication "Green in the Tropics: Exploring Energy Practices Amidst Lush Landscapes." The juxtaposition of this work with the political landscape in Georgia is indeed a curious venture, but in the spirit of unearthing the unexpected, we shall continue to illuminate this unlikely connection.
Jones (2019) offers an insightful analysis of energy geopolitics in their article "Fuel Diplomacy: Navigating Energy Dependencies and Security." Though not directly linked to our specific research inquiry, this work serves as a reminder of the intricate web of energy interconnections that stretch across continents. Our journey to uncover the correlation between Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras may seem whimsical, but as we shall soon reveal, it is not without its amusing revelations.
In "The Omniscient Power of Petroleum" by Dr. Slick Rick (2020), the author makes a compelling case for the omnipresence of petroleum in shaping global dynamics, from politics to international relations. While Dr. Slick Rick's work may not explicitly touch upon the subject of political voting patterns, it does serve as a reminder of the pervasive influence of fossil fuels in our world.
Shifting from non-fiction to the realm of fiction, the works of Michael Crude and Coalio García Marquez offer imaginative retellings of individuals and societies entangled in the throes of fossil fuel fascination. Perhaps there is more to be gleaned from these fictional accounts than meets the eye.
Moreover, while perusing social media platforms, we stumbled upon a seemingly innocuous tweet from @EcoEnigma87: "The GOP in Georgia may have their eyes on the political prize, but are they blind to the environmental ties that bind?" While online musings must be approached with caution, this particular sentiment prompts an intriguing avenue of reflection.
As we wade through this mélange of academic literature, fiction, and social media snippets, we cannot help but acknowledge the delightful absurdity of our pursuit. Yet, it is in these unexpected juxtapositions and humorous contemplations that we unearth the essence of our scholarly quest.

[[RESULTS]]
Our foray into the land of statistical analysis has unearthed a startling correlation between Republican presidential candidate votes in Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. The correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and an r-squared value of 0.9568756 for the years 1980 to 2020 leave little room for doubt about the robustness of this unexpected relationship. With a p-value less than 0.01, the probability of this association occurring by mere chance is about as likely as discovering a fossilized Tyrannosaurus rex sipping a mojito on a Honduran beach.
Fig. 1 showcases the visually compelling scatterplot that vividly presents this remarkable correlation. The data points hug the trendline so closely that one might mistake them for enthusiastic attendees at a partisan rally.
This enigmatic link between Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras may seem as peculiar as a hamster riding a unicycle, but the statistical evidence speaks for itself. It reminds us that in the colorful tapestry of data, the most surprising threads can often weave a story worth unraveling.
The significance of this correlation goes beyond the mere numbers. It prompts us to pause and reflect on the interconnectedness of global phenomena, and it leaves us marveling at the intricate dance of geopolitical and environmental forces. Who would have thought that political inclinations in the Southeastern United States could hold sway over energy practices in a small Central American nation?
As we unpack the implications of this correlation, we are reminded that academia need not always be a staid, humorless endeavor. Sometimes, the most thought-provoking revelations are accompanied by a good-natured chuckle or a raised eyebrow. In the spirit of good-humored inquiry, we invite our readers to join us in celebrating the delightful absurdity of this statistical saga. After all, who says research papers can't have a touch of whimsy?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The finding of a substantial correlation between Republican presidential candidate votes in Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras might lead one to wonder if we’ve stumbled into the plot of a fantastical, data-driven comedy. Yet, here we are, faced with a statistical relationship so unlikely, it could make even the most seasoned statistician giggle.

In the realm of scholarly pursuit, unexpected correlations often provoke spirited discussions and lighthearted musings. As we reflect on the implications of our findings, it becomes clear that our results align with the prior research in unexpected ways. The correlations between GOP votes in Georgia and energy practices in Honduras tap into the colorful tapestry of interconnected global phenomena and prompt us to recognize the whimsical dance of geopolitical and environmental forces, much like an unexpected tango between an elephant and a flamingo.

Returning to the literature review, the curious juxtaposition of political inclinations in Georgia and energy habits in Honduras, while initially whimsical, we uncovered that the correlations found in previous studies pointed to a deeper connection between seemingly unrelated variables. The works of Smith et al. and Doe highlighted the intriguing interplay between political allegiance and energy consumption, laying the groundwork for our unexpected revelation. In the spirit of academic inquiry, our findings—the numbers as robust as an immovable gargoyle—have served to validate and amplify these scholarly musings.

One might ask how GOP votes in Georgia could possibly hold sway over energy practices in a small Central American nation. And the answer, perhaps, lies in the playful unpredictability of statistics—a field where even the most seemingly preposterous relationships can be backed by solid numerical evidence. Our analysis paints a vivid picture of this remarkable correlation, as visually compelling as a kitten chasing a laser pointer. It reminds us that in the midst of scholarly pursuit, there is space for lighthearted contemplation and good-natured revelation.

As we inevitably continue down the path of empirical revelation, it is important to embrace the whimsical and unexpected—after all, who says research papers can’t have a touch of levity and mirth? So, let us raise our data-crunching glasses to this statistical saga and celebrate the revelatory humor of our scholarly pursuits. Cheers to a time when politics, fossil fuels, and statistical analyses walk into a bar and, against all odds, find common ground in a convivial statistical correlation!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia and Fossil fuel use in Honduras. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.

Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As we embark on this peculiar journey into the world of political voting patterns and environmental impact, we find ourselves at the intriguing crossroads of Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras. This seemingly bizarre connection has piqued our curiosity and compelled us to delve deeper into the realms of statistical analysis and geopolitical implications. What do Republican presidential candidate votes in the Peach State have to do with the consumption of fossil fuels in the tropical paradise of Honduras? As we traverse this uncharted territory, we are reminded of a quote often attributed to renowned physicist Albert Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible." Indeed, dear reader, the quirky correlations we uncover in this study may just leave us scratching our heads in disbelief!
Now, before you roll your eyes and dismiss this paper as a farcical attempt to draw connections where none exist, let us assure you that our approach is deeply rooted in rigorous research methodologies. It is not every day that one gets to uncover statistical patterns that raise eyebrows, prompt chuckles, and perhaps even inspire a "Eureka!" moment. Our endeavor aims not only to unravel the data-driven tale of Republican fervor in Georgia and the fossil-fueled happenings in Honduras but also to inject a hearty dose of levity into the usually somber world of academic inquiry.
As the old adage goes, "When life gives you data, make statistics." And armed with data from reputable sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we have crafted a whimsical odyssey of analysis and interpretation. So, dear reader, buckle up and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the world of numbers, political inclinations, and environmental quirkiness. Together, let us savor the delightful irony of this scholarly expedition as we uncover the surprising connections between the red and the green!

[[RESULTS]]
Our foray into the land of statistical analysis has unearthed a startling correlation between Republican presidential candidate votes in Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. The correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and an r-squared value of 0.9568756 for the years 1980 to 2020 leave little room for doubt about the robustness of this unexpected relationship. With a p-value less than 0.01, the probability of this association occurring by mere chance is about as likely as discovering a fossilized Tyrannosaurus rex sipping a mojito on a Honduran beach.
Fig. 1 showcases the visually compelling scatterplot that vividly presents this remarkable correlation. The data points hug the trendline so closely that one might mistake them for enthusiastic attendees at a partisan rally.
This enigmatic link between Georgia GOP votes and fossil fuel use in Honduras may seem as peculiar as a hamster riding a unicycle, but the statistical evidence speaks for itself. It reminds us that in the colorful tapestry of data, the most surprising threads can often weave a story worth unraveling.
The significance of this correlation goes beyond the mere numbers. It prompts us to pause and reflect on the interconnectedness of global phenomena, and it leaves us marveling at the intricate dance of geopolitical and environmental forces. Who would have thought that political inclinations in the Southeastern United States could hold sway over energy practices in a small Central American nation?
As we unpack the implications of this correlation, we are reminded that academia need not always be a staid, humorless endeavor. Sometimes, the most thought-provoking revelations are accompanied by a good-natured chuckle or a raised eyebrow. In the spirit of good-humored inquiry, we invite our readers to join us in celebrating the delightful absurdity of this statistical saga. After all, who says research papers can't have a touch of whimsy?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the correlation between Republican presidential candidate votes in Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras has left us both scratching our heads and shaking our heads in disbelief. The significant correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 between these seemingly disparate variables has blown our minds like a hurricane blowing through a wind farm. It's as if the data itself is telling us a bedtime story that starts with "Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, a conservative vote led to higher fossil fuel consumption."

However, before we get too carried away with these findings, let's not forget to take them with a grain of salt, or perhaps a barrel of crude oil. Despite the compelling statistical evidence, there may still be a burrowing mole of correlation lurking in the underground pipelines of causation waiting to be unearthed.

Nevertheless, given the humorous and unexpected nature of this correlation, we can confidently assert that no more research in this area is needed. It seems that the statistical gods have already gifted us with an astonishingly bizarre insight that is as real as the Loch Ness Monster riding a tandem bicycle. So, dear reader, let us bid adieu to this quirky expedition and bask in the delightful absurdity of our findings. After all, who says serious academic research can't have a pinch of whimsy and a dollop of levity?

In the words of the great Sherlock Holmes, "The game is afoot!" But in our case, it seems the correlation is afuel!


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 Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Entanglements


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 Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Society for Transnational Political Ecology and Energy Analysis


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 Fuel(ed) for Thought: Unveiling the Correlation Between Georgia GOP Votes and Fossil Fuel Use in Honduras with an abstract of In this research, we delve into the rather unconventional relationship between Republican presidential candidate votes in the state of Georgia and fossil fuel usage in Honduras. Employing data from prestigious sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out to unravel this intriguing puzzle.
Surprisingly, our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9782002 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1980 to 2020. This correlation suggests a tangible connection between the two seemingly disparate variables. As we explore the implications of this unexpected correlation, we also uncover the humorous side of this unlikely association. Through clever data analysis and a healthy dose of lighthearted wit, our research aims to shed light on this peculiar link between political preferences in the Peach State and energy habits in the tropical heart of Central America.

ChatGPT:

Georgia GOP votes, fossil fuel use, Honduras, correlation, Republican presidential candidate votes, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, political preferences, energy habits, Central America

*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

Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia
Detailed data title: Total votes cast for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia

Fossil fuel use in Honduras
Detailed data title: Total fossil fuel use in Honduras in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Fossil fuel use in Honduras

Correlation r = 0.9782002 (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 = 0.9568756 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 95.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Fossil fuel use in Honduras) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia) over the 11 years from 1980 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.9E-7. 0.0000001891651807664608200000
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 0.98 in 1.9E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 5,286,385 random variables You don't actually need 5 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 10 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 10 because we have two variables measured over a period of 11 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.

[ 0.92, 0.99 ] 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.
19801984198819921996200020042008201220162020
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia (Total votes)654168106872010813309952521080840141972019142502048760207869020891002461850
Fossil fuel use in Honduras (Billion kWh)0.1270.1750.1650.1880.9661.307543.198823.8174.014744.275125.1032




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([654168,1068720,1081330,995252,1080840,1419720,1914250,2048760,2078690,2089100,2461850,])
array_2 = np.array([0.127,0.175,0.165,0.188,0.966,1.30754,3.19882,3.817,4.01474,4.27512,5.1032,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Georgia"
array_2_name = "Fossil fuel use in Honduras"

# 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?

I'm genuinely thankful for your rating!


Correlation ID: 4481 · Black Variable ID: 25968 · Red Variable ID: 23720
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0