about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,685 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air quality in Orlando and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to make baby'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The fresher air must have put people in the mood for some clean conceptions. It's like they say, when the air's nice, it's twice as likely for a little one to be sprout-lando!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image using DALL·E-3 that depicts a vibrant and colorful pop art scene of Orlando. The image should feature a bright and clear sky, with gentle, swirling lines representing the crisp air and a stylized cityscape in the background. People should be portrayed in a stylized, whimsical manner, perhaps with exaggerated features and bold, contrasting colors. An optimistic and hopeful atmosphere should be conveyed, with individuals shown joyfully interacting with their smartphones while also enjoying the fresh air. The "how to make baby" Google searches can be subtly hinted at through small, playful visual cues, such as cartoonish thought bubbles or playful imagery. The overall composition should exude a sense of new beginnings and the potential for growth and creation, reflecting the uplifting and refreshing atmosphere of the city. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. 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: inspired by bauhaus Realistic 3D Pixar Style Pop art Pop art
ChatGPT: Pop art

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby', in the following situation: The fresher air must have put people in the mood for some clean conceptions. It's like they say, when the air's nice, it's twice as likely for a little one to be sprout-lando!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: The air in Orlando is crisp and clean, with a gentle breeze blowing through the city. People are out and about, enjoying the fresh air, and there's a sense of lightness and optimism in the atmosphere. At the same time, on their smartphones, many are searching for "how to make baby" on Google, perhaps inspired by the uplifting air quality. The combination of the clear air and the hopeful searches creates a sense of new beginnings and the potential for growth and creation.

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: [ Pop art ] and depicting this scene: The air in Orlando is crisp and clean, with a gentle breeze blowing through the city. People are out and about, enjoying the fresh air, and there's a sense of lightness and optimism in the atmosphere. At the same time, on their smartphones, many are searching for "how to make baby" on Google, perhaps inspired by the uplifting air quality. The combination of the clear air and the hopeful searches creates a sense of new beginnings and the potential for growth and creation. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image using DALL·E-3 that depicts a vibrant and colorful pop art scene of Orlando. The image should feature a bright and clear sky, with gentle, swirling lines representing the crisp air and a stylized cityscape in the background. People should be portrayed in a stylized, whimsical manner, perhaps with exaggerated features and bold, contrasting colors. An optimistic and hopeful atmosphere should be conveyed, with individuals shown joyfully interacting with their smartphones while also enjoying the fresh air. The "how to make baby" Google searches can be subtly hinted at through small, playful visual cues, such as cartoonish thought bubbles or playful imagery. The overall composition should exude a sense of new beginnings and the potential for growth and creation, reflecting the uplifting and refreshing atmosphere of the city.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Air quality in Orlando caused how to make baby (Google searches for 'how to make baby') to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

The Journal of Environmental Influences on Reproductive Behavior

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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 and p < 0.01 for 2004 to 2023.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.


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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As researchers, we often find ourselves delving into the serious and weighty matters of our fields. But every now and then, we stumble upon something that makes us raise an eyebrow, tilt our heads, and ponder, "Wait, what?" Such is the case with our investigation into the charmingly peculiar relationship between air quality in the beautiful city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.

Now, before you assume that we've crafted an elaborate prank or embarked on some whimsical journey, we assure you that this study is as legit as they come. With a combination of utmost scientific rigor and a sprinkle of playful curiosity, we sought to unravel the mystery behind the Baby-Making Breeze, as we affectionately dubbed it.

The idea may sound like a sitcom plot, but believe it or not, the connection between environmental conditions and human behavior has been a subject of fascination for researchers across various disciplines. While the association between air quality and respiratory ailments or mental health has been thoroughly investigated, the relationship between airborne particles and... well, baby-making tendencies, presents a delightful twist.

So, with a twinkle in our eyes and a raised eyebrow, we set out on this journey to explore the unexpected correlation between Orlando's air quality and the internet's curious inquiries into the art of baby-making. And what we uncovered was not just a statistical quirk, but a delightful reminder of the quirky side of human nature and its responses to the world around us.

Hold onto your science hats and get ready for a delightful romp through the land of data, whimsy, and a few raised eyebrows as we unravel the Baby-Making Breeze of Orlando!


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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a couple popular internet memes that are related to one of the topics.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves delving into the serious and weighty matters of our fields. But every now and then, we stumble upon something that makes us raise an eyebrow, tilt our heads, and ponder, "Wait, what?" Such is the case with our investigation into the charmingly peculiar relationship between air quality in the beautiful city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.
Now, before you assume that we've crafted an elaborate prank or embarked on some whimsical journey, we assure you that this study is as legit as they come. With a combination of utmost scientific rigor and a sprinkle of playful curiosity, we sought to unravel the mystery behind the Baby-Making Breeze, as we affectionately dubbed it.
The idea may sound like a sitcom plot, but believe it or not, the connection between environmental conditions and human behavior has been a subject of fascination for researchers across various disciplines. While the association between air quality and respiratory ailments or mental health has been thoroughly investigated, the relationship between airborne particles and... well, baby-making tendencies, presents a delightful twist.
So, with a twinkle in our eyes and a raised eyebrow, we set out on this journey to explore the unexpected correlation between Orlando's air quality and the internet's curious inquiries into the art of baby-making. And what we uncovered was not just a statistical quirk, but a delightful reminder of the quirky side of human nature and its responses to the world around us.
Hold onto your science hats and get ready for a delightful romp through the land of data, whimsy, and a few raised eyebrows as we unravel the Baby-Making Breeze of Orlando!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The relationship between environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of scientific inquiry, as researchers seek to uncover the interplay between external influences and our whimsical responses. Smith et al. (2015) examined the impact of air quality on respiratory health, while Doe and Jones (2018) delved into the psychological effects of environmental pollution. The connection between airborne pollutants and their influence on human behavior, however, took a whimsical turn in our investigation into the correlation between air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.

In "The Air We Breathe: Implications for Health and Well-being," the authors delve into the multitude of ways in which air quality affects human health, from respiratory ailments to cognitive function. Likewise, "The Psychology of Pollution" by Brown and Lee explores the psychological repercussions of living in polluted environments, highlighting the potential impact on mood and behavior. While these studies offer valuable insights into the serious consequences of poor air quality, our research uncovers a lighthearted twist in the relationship between Orlando's atmospheric conditions and the whimsical inquiries made by its residents.

Turning our attention to the world of literature, non-fiction books such as "The Baby-Making Blueprint: A Practical Guide to Parenthood" and "The Science of Baby-Making" take a more earnest approach to the subject matter. On the other hand, fiction works like "A Breath of Fresh Air" and "Cloudy with a Chance of Romance" offer a whimsical take on the impact of environmental elements on human romance and procreation. These works serve as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of the human response to environmental cues, blending scientific inquiry with a dash of storytelling and imagination.

Moreover, in the realm of popular culture, the internet meme "Distracted Boyfriend" humorously illustrates the unpredictable nature of human attention and desire, mirroring the unexpected correlation we uncovered between air quality in Orlando and searches related to procreation. Like the ever-changing whims of the internet, human responses to environmental factors can often defy predictability, sparking a light-hearted chuckle as we ponder the curious ways in which we navigate the world around us.


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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2023

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves delving into the serious and weighty matters of our fields. But every now and then, we stumble upon something that makes us raise an eyebrow, tilt our heads, and ponder, "Wait, what?" Such is the case with our investigation into the charmingly peculiar relationship between air quality in the beautiful city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.
Now, before you assume that we've crafted an elaborate prank or embarked on some whimsical journey, we assure you that this study is as legit as they come. With a combination of utmost scientific rigor and a sprinkle of playful curiosity, we sought to unravel the mystery behind the Baby-Making Breeze, as we affectionately dubbed it.
The idea may sound like a sitcom plot, but believe it or not, the connection between environmental conditions and human behavior has been a subject of fascination for researchers across various disciplines. While the association between air quality and respiratory ailments or mental health has been thoroughly investigated, the relationship between airborne particles and... well, baby-making tendencies, presents a delightful twist.
So, with a twinkle in our eyes and a raised eyebrow, we set out on this journey to explore the unexpected correlation between Orlando's air quality and the internet's curious inquiries into the art of baby-making. And what we uncovered was not just a statistical quirk, but a delightful reminder of the quirky side of human nature and its responses to the world around us.
Hold onto your science hats and get ready for a delightful romp through the land of data, whimsy, and a few raised eyebrows as we unravel the Baby-Making Breeze of Orlando!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To crack the case of the Baby-Making Breeze, we embarked on a research adventure that was part Sherlock Holmes and part bumbling Inspector Clouseau. Our data collection methods were as varied and colorful as a box of crayons, though hopefully without the wax buildup. We must confess, we definitely got some raised eyebrows from our fellow colleagues when we explained our approach, but hey, sometimes you've got to think outside the box – and maybe even gaze at the clouds to catch those elusive nuggets of insight.

Firstly, we gathered air quality data for Orlando from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This involved a painstaking process of sifting through data on pollutants, particulate matter, and other atmospheric components that could potentially impact human behavior. We combed through the data like treasure hunters searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack, or in this case, the correlation between air quality and procreative musings.

Next, we turned to the delightful world of Google Trends to get a grip on the frequency of searches related to 'how to make baby'. Analyzing search trends allowed us to peek behind the virtual curtains of the internet and observe the intriguing patterns of human curiosity. We could almost hear the clicks of keyboards and the whispered queries into search bars as we delved into the realm of baby-making advice in the digital age.

Having amassed our trove of treasure—err, data—we unleashed the power of statistics to wrangle the information into submission. We utilized the tried-and-true methods of correlation analysis to unearth any potential links between air quality and the digital quest for baby-making knowledge. Picture us as intrepid explorers carving our way through a dense jungle of statistical significance, with the occasional vine swing for good measure.

We also considered factors such as seasonality, meteorological conditions, and other potential influencers of the data, because, let's face it, real life is often messier than a laboratory cleanroom. Our aim was to capture the nuanced interplay between air quality and the whimsical escapades of human behavior, making sure to account for any sneaky confounders that might have been lurking in the underbrush of our data.

In a fitting nod to the era of big data, we spanned a generous timeframe from 2004 to 2023, allowing us to capture the ebb and flow of both air quality and the digital pulsations of baby-making inquiries. Like time travelers with an eye for statistics, we traversed through the years, taking note of any curious deviations or trends that might reveal the hidden dance between Orlando's atmosphere and the aspirations of would-be parents.

Now, while we're not claiming to have conjured up the spirit of Nostradamus, we certainly deployed some robust statistical tools to peer into the crystal ball of data. Our approach may have been unorthodox, perhaps even reminiscent of a certain wizard's divination techniques, but we assure you, there was a method to our merriment. So, with a twinkle in our eyes and a dab of statistical magic, we set out to untangle the enigma of the Baby-Making Breeze. And what we found will surely leave you chuckling in surprise.


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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends .

For the time period 2004 to 2023, you found a correlation 0.8290033, r-squared of 0.6872465, and p < 0.01.

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves delving into the serious and weighty matters of our fields. But every now and then, we stumble upon something that makes us raise an eyebrow, tilt our heads, and ponder, "Wait, what?" Such is the case with our investigation into the charmingly peculiar relationship between air quality in the beautiful city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.
Now, before you assume that we've crafted an elaborate prank or embarked on some whimsical journey, we assure you that this study is as legit as they come. With a combination of utmost scientific rigor and a sprinkle of playful curiosity, we sought to unravel the mystery behind the Baby-Making Breeze, as we affectionately dubbed it.
The idea may sound like a sitcom plot, but believe it or not, the connection between environmental conditions and human behavior has been a subject of fascination for researchers across various disciplines. While the association between air quality and respiratory ailments or mental health has been thoroughly investigated, the relationship between airborne particles and... well, baby-making tendencies, presents a delightful twist.
So, with a twinkle in our eyes and a raised eyebrow, we set out on this journey to explore the unexpected correlation between Orlando's air quality and the internet's curious inquiries into the art of baby-making. And what we uncovered was not just a statistical quirk, but a delightful reminder of the quirky side of human nature and its responses to the world around us.
Hold onto your science hats and get ready for a delightful romp through the land of data, whimsy, and a few raised eyebrows as we unravel the Baby-Making Breeze of Orlando!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis of the data from 2004 to 2023 revealed a surprisingly robust and statistically significant correlation between air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. The correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 and an r-squared value of 0.6872465 indicated a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate factors, with a p-value of less than 0.01. Moreover, our findings provided a whimsical twist to the complex interplay of environmental influences and human behavior.

Fig. 1 illustrates the association between air quality and 'how to make baby' searches, showcasing a clear pattern of increasing search activity alongside improvements in air quality.

We were struck by the remarkably consistent trend throughout the years, highlighting the intriguing connection between environmental quality and the curiosity of individuals regarding the baby-making process. The results not only challenged our initial expectations but also left us with a sense of wonder at the delightful quirks of human behavior.

The strength of this association prompts further investigation into the underlying psychological and social mechanisms driving the Baby-Making Breeze phenomenon. While we certainly did not anticipate this peculiar revelation, we are excited to delve deeper into the intersection of environmental factors and human proclivities, offering a fresh perspective in the realm of environmental psychology and public health.

In summary, our findings provide tangible evidence of the Baby-Making Breeze, tying together the importance of air quality with the lighthearted and unexpected nature of human responses. This study serves as a testament to the multifaceted interactions between our environment and our behaviors, reminding us that even the most peculiar correlations can offer valuable insights into the whimsical side of human nature.

In conclusion, the results of this investigation not only present a statistically sound connection but also offer a comical lens through which to view the serious issue of air quality and human behavior, truly adding a breath of whimsy to the scientific discourse.


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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. 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]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The relationship between environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of scientific inquiry, as researchers seek to uncover the interplay between external influences and our whimsical responses. Smith et al. (2015) examined the impact of air quality on respiratory health, while Doe and Jones (2018) delved into the psychological effects of environmental pollution. The connection between airborne pollutants and their influence on human behavior, however, took a whimsical turn in our investigation into the correlation between air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.
In "The Air We Breathe: Implications for Health and Well-being," the authors delve into the multitude of ways in which air quality affects human health, from respiratory ailments to cognitive function. Likewise, "The Psychology of Pollution" by Brown and Lee explores the psychological repercussions of living in polluted environments, highlighting the potential impact on mood and behavior. While these studies offer valuable insights into the serious consequences of poor air quality, our research uncovers a lighthearted twist in the relationship between Orlando's atmospheric conditions and the whimsical inquiries made by its residents.
Turning our attention to the world of literature, non-fiction books such as "The Baby-Making Blueprint: A Practical Guide to Parenthood" and "The Science of Baby-Making" take a more earnest approach to the subject matter. On the other hand, fiction works like "A Breath of Fresh Air" and "Cloudy with a Chance of Romance" offer a whimsical take on the impact of environmental elements on human romance and procreation. These works serve as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of the human response to environmental cues, blending scientific inquiry with a dash of storytelling and imagination.
Moreover, in the realm of popular culture, the internet meme "Distracted Boyfriend" humorously illustrates the unpredictable nature of human attention and desire, mirroring the unexpected correlation we uncovered between air quality in Orlando and searches related to procreation. Like the ever-changing whims of the internet, human responses to environmental factors can often defy predictability, sparking a light-hearted chuckle as we ponder the curious ways in which we navigate the world around us.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from 2004 to 2023 revealed a surprisingly robust and statistically significant correlation between air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. The correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 and an r-squared value of 0.6872465 indicated a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate factors, with a p-value of less than 0.01. Moreover, our findings provided a whimsical twist to the complex interplay of environmental influences and human behavior.
Fig. 1 illustrates the association between air quality and 'how to make baby' searches, showcasing a clear pattern of increasing search activity alongside improvements in air quality.
We were struck by the remarkably consistent trend throughout the years, highlighting the intriguing connection between environmental quality and the curiosity of individuals regarding the baby-making process. The results not only challenged our initial expectations but also left us with a sense of wonder at the delightful quirks of human behavior.
The strength of this association prompts further investigation into the underlying psychological and social mechanisms driving the Baby-Making Breeze phenomenon. While we certainly did not anticipate this peculiar revelation, we are excited to delve deeper into the intersection of environmental factors and human proclivities, offering a fresh perspective in the realm of environmental psychology and public health.
In summary, our findings provide tangible evidence of the Baby-Making Breeze, tying together the importance of air quality with the lighthearted and unexpected nature of human responses. This study serves as a testament to the multifaceted interactions between our environment and our behaviors, reminding us that even the most peculiar correlations can offer valuable insights into the whimsical side of human nature.
In conclusion, the results of this investigation not only present a statistically sound connection but also offer a comical lens through which to view the serious issue of air quality and human behavior, truly adding a breath of whimsy to the scientific discourse.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The striking correlation between air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby' has provoked a wave of bemused fascination among our research team. Our whimsical endeavor has uncovered a truly unexpected connection between environmental factors and human curiosity, emphasizing the light-hearted and unpredictable nature of human behavior.

Our findings align with the prior research on the relationship between environmental influences and human whims. Smith et al. (2015) emphasized the impact of air quality on respiratory health, while Doe and Jones (2018) explored the psychological effects of environmental pollution. Delightfully, our study revealed a whimsical twist in this narrative, demonstrating a comical yet statistically sound link between air quality and the captivating quest for baby-making knowledge in the digital sphere.

Referencing the curious items from our literature review, it is apparent that the Baby-Making Breeze phenomenon serves as a delightful addition to the multifaceted nature of human responses to environmental cues. In the same manner as the whimsically unpredictable nature of internet memes, our findings underscore the unexpected and comical dimensions of human behavior, offering a refreshing twist to the serious discourse on air quality and its implications.

As we consider the substantial correlation coefficient and r-squared value, our results provide robust support for the notion that as air quality improves, Orlando residents show a heightened interest in the intricacies of procreation. These findings not only debunk conventional wisdom but also add a breath of whimsy to the staid world of environmental psychology and public health.

The implications of our research extend beyond the statistical correlation, as they invite a buoyant reconsideration of the interplay between environmental cues and human responses. The Baby-Making Breeze phenomenon opens a playful window into the whimsical intricacies of human behavior, challenging us to embrace the unexpected and delight in the humorous side of scientific inquiry.

In closing, our study not only adds a comical tint to the subject of air quality and human behavior but also underscores the need for a light-hearted outlook on the intricate dance between environmental influences and human caprice. Our results invite further exploration into this whimsical intersection, inviting scholars to embrace a playful lens through which to view the curious and comical nuances of human nature.


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 Air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. 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]]
The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves delving into the serious and weighty matters of our fields. But every now and then, we stumble upon something that makes us raise an eyebrow, tilt our heads, and ponder, "Wait, what?" Such is the case with our investigation into the charmingly peculiar relationship between air quality in the beautiful city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'.
Now, before you assume that we've crafted an elaborate prank or embarked on some whimsical journey, we assure you that this study is as legit as they come. With a combination of utmost scientific rigor and a sprinkle of playful curiosity, we sought to unravel the mystery behind the Baby-Making Breeze, as we affectionately dubbed it.
The idea may sound like a sitcom plot, but believe it or not, the connection between environmental conditions and human behavior has been a subject of fascination for researchers across various disciplines. While the association between air quality and respiratory ailments or mental health has been thoroughly investigated, the relationship between airborne particles and... well, baby-making tendencies, presents a delightful twist.
So, with a twinkle in our eyes and a raised eyebrow, we set out on this journey to explore the unexpected correlation between Orlando's air quality and the internet's curious inquiries into the art of baby-making. And what we uncovered was not just a statistical quirk, but a delightful reminder of the quirky side of human nature and its responses to the world around us.
Hold onto your science hats and get ready for a delightful romp through the land of data, whimsy, and a few raised eyebrows as we unravel the Baby-Making Breeze of Orlando!

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from 2004 to 2023 revealed a surprisingly robust and statistically significant correlation between air quality in Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. The correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 and an r-squared value of 0.6872465 indicated a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate factors, with a p-value of less than 0.01. Moreover, our findings provided a whimsical twist to the complex interplay of environmental influences and human behavior.
Fig. 1 illustrates the association between air quality and 'how to make baby' searches, showcasing a clear pattern of increasing search activity alongside improvements in air quality.
We were struck by the remarkably consistent trend throughout the years, highlighting the intriguing connection between environmental quality and the curiosity of individuals regarding the baby-making process. The results not only challenged our initial expectations but also left us with a sense of wonder at the delightful quirks of human behavior.
The strength of this association prompts further investigation into the underlying psychological and social mechanisms driving the Baby-Making Breeze phenomenon. While we certainly did not anticipate this peculiar revelation, we are excited to delve deeper into the intersection of environmental factors and human proclivities, offering a fresh perspective in the realm of environmental psychology and public health.
In summary, our findings provide tangible evidence of the Baby-Making Breeze, tying together the importance of air quality with the lighthearted and unexpected nature of human responses. This study serves as a testament to the multifaceted interactions between our environment and our behaviors, reminding us that even the most peculiar correlations can offer valuable insights into the whimsical side of human nature.
In conclusion, the results of this investigation not only present a statistically sound connection but also offer a comical lens through which to view the serious issue of air quality and human behavior, truly adding a breath of whimsy to the scientific discourse.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In wrapping up our research on the Baby-Making Breeze, we can't help but chuckle at the unexpected turns of scientific inquiry. Who would have thought that the air quality in Orlando could have such an impact on the procreative ponderings of its residents and visitors? It's like Mother Nature is saying, "Breathe in that fresh air and start thinking about babies!" Indeed, our findings have revealed a correlation so strong that it practically breezed through our statistical tests like a playful zephyr.

While this study has certainly brought some lighthearted amusement to the usually solemn realms of environmental science and public health, it has also underscored the importance of considering the whimsical side of human behavior in response to environmental stimuli. We're not just discussing air quality here; we're talking about the breezy catalyst for baby-making contemplations. It seems like Orlando's air isn't just filled with oxygen and pollutants; it's also sprinkled with a hint of the stork's magic dust.

As the dust settles on this discovery, we must acknowledge that further research in this area may elicit a few giggles, but no longer needed! Our paper has blown the lid off this breezy correlation, leaving us with a whimsical reminder of the delightful caprices of human nature intertwined with the elements around us. So let's bid adieu to the Baby-Making Breeze, knowing that it has brought a gust of goofiness and a breath of fresh air to the scientific community. Until the next unexpected discovery blows our way, let's keep our spirits high, our puns at the ready, and our air quality top-notch!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Influences on Reproductive Behavior


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby'. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Environmental and Reproductive Research


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Baby-Making Breeze: Uncovering the Link Between Air Quality in Orlando and Google Searches for 'How to Make Baby' with an abstract of In this study, we investigate the curious relationship between air quality in the city of Orlando and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Using a combination of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, our research team set out to determine if there was any connection between the two seemingly unrelated factors. To our surprise, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8290033 (p < 0.01) for the period from 2004 to 2023. This correlation suggests that as air quality in Orlando improves, there is an increase in searches related to procreation. Our findings not only shed light on the impact of environmental factors on human behavior, but also provide a comical angle to the serious issue of air quality and reproductive pursuits. We offer a lighthearted interpretation of our results, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues.

ChatGPT:

Orlando air quality, Google searches for 'how to make baby', correlation between air quality and fertility, environmental factors and human behavior, impact of air quality on reproductive pursuits, whimsical nature of human responses to environmental cues

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Air quality in Orlando
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with good or moderate air quality in Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air quality in Orlando

Google searches for 'how to make baby'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'how to make baby' (Worldwide), with quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'how to make baby'

Correlation r = 0.8290033 (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 = 0.6872465 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 68.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'how to make baby') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air quality in Orlando) over the 20 years from 2004 through 2023.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 6.3E-6. 0.0000062678100441419870000000
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 0.83 in 0.00063% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 159,545 random variables You don't actually need 159 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 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.

[ 0.61, 0.93 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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


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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
20042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023
Air quality in Orlando (Good air quality)96.174994.246693.698695.068598.360799.178197.808296.712398.087499.178199.452199.72699.726899.178199.178198.356210010010098.9011
Google searches for 'how to make baby' (Rel. search volume)20.333318.523.083327.083334.833344.33335560.41677379.916783.7584.833385.083384.577.083372.833378.583369.083366.166762.2222




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.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




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([96.1749,94.2466,93.6986,95.0685,98.3607,99.1781,97.8082,96.7123,98.0874,99.1781,99.4521,99.726,99.7268,99.1781,99.1781,98.3562,100,100,100,98.9011,])
array_2 = np.array([20.3333,18.5,23.0833,27.0833,34.8333,44.3333,55,60.4167,73,79.9167,83.75,84.8333,85.0833,84.5,77.0833,72.8333,78.5833,69.0833,66.1667,62.2222,])
array_1_name = "Air quality in Orlando"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'how to make baby'"

# 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?

Your rating is stellar!


Correlation ID: 4685 · Black Variable ID: 21013 · Red Variable ID: 1497
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0