Spurious correlation #4,704 · 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 Democratic Presidential candidate in Maine and the second variable is Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. The chart goes from 1980 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Maine and the second variable is Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. The chart goes from 1980 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As more Mainers supported the Democratic candidate, the collective excitement generated an unusual amount of air hubbub. This air hubbub, consisting of highly charged political particles, wafted down to The Bahamas, where it inexplicably interacted with dormant fuel reserves. Before long, these fossil fuels, previously minding their own business, were overcome with a sudden urge to combust in support of their own preferred political party. And that's how, in a shocking turn of events, the political sway from Maine led to a spike in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. After all, who knew that democracy could be so... incendiary?

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: In a bustling town in Maine, people proudly cast their votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate. The air buzzed with excitement, creating an energetic atmosphere. As the political fervor spread, it inexplicably drifted southward to The Bahamas. In a quiet corner of the island, dormant fossil fuel reserves suddenly became agitated. Before anyone knew it, the fuels ignited, adding unexpected energy to the air. The political sway from Maine sparked an increase in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas, a surprising and incendiary turn of events. Generated Image Prompt: A vibrant town square in Maine, with flags waving and people lined up to cast their votes, while in the background, an island in The Bahamas with a quiet corner where fossil fuel reserves suddenly burst into flames, adding an unexpected fiery energy to the scene. 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 Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. 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: Futuristic a funny image macro Realistic Macabre Art nouveau
ChatGPT: Realistic

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 Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas, in the following situation: As more Mainers supported the Democratic candidate, the collective excitement generated an unusual amount of air hubbub. This air hubbub, consisting of highly charged political particles, wafted down to The Bahamas, where it inexplicably interacted with dormant fuel reserves. Before long, these fossil fuels, previously minding their own business, were overcome with a sudden urge to combust in support of their own preferred political party. And that's how, in a shocking turn of events, the political sway from Maine led to a spike in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. After all, who knew that democracy could be so... incendiary?. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling town in Maine, people proudly cast their votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate. The air buzzed with excitement, creating an energetic atmosphere. As the political fervor spread, it inexplicably drifted southward to The Bahamas. In a quiet corner of the island, dormant fossil fuel reserves suddenly became agitated. Before anyone knew it, the fuels ignited, adding unexpected energy to the air. The political sway from Maine sparked an increase in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas, a surprising and incendiary turn of events.

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: [ Realistic ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling town in Maine, people proudly cast their votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate. The air buzzed with excitement, creating an energetic atmosphere. As the political fervor spread, it inexplicably drifted southward to The Bahamas. In a quiet corner of the island, dormant fossil fuel reserves suddenly became agitated. Before anyone knew it, the fuels ignited, adding unexpected energy to the air. The political sway from Maine sparked an increase in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas, a surprising and incendiary turn of events. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: In a bustling town in Maine, people proudly cast their votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate. The air buzzed with excitement, creating an energetic atmosphere. As the political fervor spread, it inexplicably drifted southward to The Bahamas. In a quiet corner of the island, dormant fossil fuel reserves suddenly became agitated. Before anyone knew it, the fuels ignited, adding unexpected energy to the air. The political sway from Maine sparked an increase in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas, a surprising and incendiary turn of events. Generated Image Prompt: A vibrant town square in Maine, with flags waving and people lined up to cast their votes, while in the background, an island in The Bahamas with a quiet corner where fossil fuel reserves suddenly burst into flames, adding an unexpected fiery energy to the scene.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine caused Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas to increase.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use

The Journal of Political Ecotrends

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You 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 Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected entanglement of U.S. presidential election voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas. While this research initially seems as unlikely as a polar bear in swim trunks, we discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between the two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from prominent sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our team set out to connect the dots--or in this case, the votes and the fuel.

Our analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9724069, which left us more baffled than a confused penguin in a sandstorm. We also secured a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2020, indicating that the relationship we've uncovered is definitely not just a fluke - unlike the ones you'd find on a Caribbean vacation.

The implications of this study, although as surprising as finding a mermaid in a Maine lobster trap, cannot be ignored. Our findings hint at an intriguing interplay between political inclinations and environmental behavior, showing that the connection between voting trends and energy consumption might be as intimate as a seashell and the ocean. While the exact causation behind this correlation eludes us for now, our research opens up new avenues for exploration, much like a treasure map just waiting to be discovered.

In conclusion, our study sheds light on an unexpected connection, proving yet again that the world of social and environmental dynamics is full of delightful surprises, much like a beachcomber stumbling upon a rare seashell. So next time you think about voting or fossil fuels, remember: they may be more interconnected than you think, just like a good ol' dad joke and an eye roll.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we navigate the choppy waters of political analysis and environmental scrutiny, it's often difficult to predict the strange and wonderful connections that may arise. Just like trying to figure out the punchline to a dad joke - you never quite know where it's headed.
In the context of U.S. presidential elections, the state of Maine has often been discussed for its distinctive voting patterns, not unlike a lobster with a penchant for blueberries - surprising, but undeniably ingrained in its nature. On the other hand, the tropical paradise of The Bahamas is renowned for its beautiful sandy beaches and crystal-clear waters, making it seem light years away from the rugged coastlines of Maine. Yet, as we delved into our research, we were about to uncover a connection more unexpected than a coconut falling from a palm tree at the stroke of midnight.
Our investigation set out to explore the curious link between the votes cast for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the consumption of fossil fuels in The Bahamas. This correlation seemed about as plausible as a flamingo trying to navigate a blizzard, but our data-driven approach unveiled a far more robust association than we ever anticipated.
As we sifted through the data like a treasure hunter on a quest for gold doubloons, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient, leaving us scratching our heads more than a cat with an itch. The statistical significance of our findings was as clear as the ocean waters off Nassau, with a p-value that said "this connection is not just the result of random chance" louder than a conch shell on the beach.
The implications of our findings are as noteworthy as a sighting of the Loch Ness Monster - they challenge conventional wisdom and beckon us to reevaluate our understanding of the intricate web of human behavior and environmental impact. Just as a beachgoer might stumble upon a message in a bottle, we stumbled upon a revelation that invites further exploration and consideration.
In this paper, we present our unexpected findings and invite our esteemed colleagues to join us in unpacking this uncharted territory. After all, unraveling the mysteries of political choices and environmental consequences is not unlike finding the perfect dad joke - it requires a keen eye for the unexpected and an appreciation for the delightfully absurd.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith et al. (2015) investigated the voting patterns in Maine and established correlations with various socio-economic factors, including education levels, median household income, and prevalence of blueberry festivals. However, their study stopped short of uncovering any connection to tropical island fuel consumption, leaving a gap in the scholarship wider than a shark's grin.

Doe and Jones (2018) conducted a comprehensive analysis of fossil fuel consumption in small island nations, delving into the complexities of energy infrastructure, economic dependencies, and the allure of oceanfront sunsets. While their work painted a vivid picture of energy dynamics in the tropics, they failed to make any reference to a cold northeastern state's voting preferences, leaving us more puzzled than a polar bear trying to find a snow cone stand.

In "The Energy Paradox: From Fossil Fuels to Solar Power" by Green (2017), the author explores the intricate relationship between energy choices and environmental impact, shedding light on the complexities of human behavior in the face of climate change. While the book is a treasure trove of insights, it neglects to mention anything about the voting idiosyncrasies of the people of Maine, leaving us yearning for an explanation as tantalizing as a shell collector craving a rare conch.

Moving into the realm of fiction, "The Shell Game" by Ocean (2005) offers a whimsical tale of anthropomorphic sea creatures navigating the challenges of ocean life. Although it does not directly touch on political voting or fuel consumption, the story's themes of unexpected connections and hidden truths resonate with our own surprising findings, much like a crab appreciating an unexpected clash of cymbals.

As we reflect on childhood influences, we recall the animated series "Captain Planet and the Planeteers," which instilled in many a young viewer a sense of environmental responsibility. The iconic show's messages about the power of collective action and the importance of protecting natural resources echo the themes of our study, reminding us that the ties between human behavior and environmental impact are as enduring as the show's catchy theme song - perhaps even with a pun or two.

In "SpongeBob SquarePants," the underwater adventures of a sea sponge and his friends may seem far removed from our research, but the show's playful exploration of marine life and its ecological themes serves as a lighthearted reminder of the interconnectedness of all living things. Moreover, SpongeBob's eternal optimism and resilience in the face of challenges inspire us to approach our unexpected findings with a similar buoyant spirit, much like a yellow sponge in a pineapple under the sea - unexpected, but undeniably intriguing.

Now, we wade deeper into the waters of our analysis, armed with a bevy of disparate sources that hint at the entanglement of Maine votes and Bahamian fuel use, inviting us to untangle this enigmatic connection with the enthusiasm of a marine biologist discovering a new species - or a researcher unearthing a long-buried dad joke.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected entanglement of U.S. presidential election voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas. While this research initially seems as unlikely as a polar bear in swim trunks, we discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between the two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from prominent sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our team set out to connect the dots--or in this case, the votes and the fuel.

Our analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9724069, which left us more baffled than a confused penguin in a sandstorm. We also secured a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2020, indicating that the relationship we've uncovered is definitely not just a fluke - unlike the ones you'd find on a Caribbean vacation.

The implications of this study, although as surprising as finding a mermaid in a Maine lobster trap, cannot be ignored. Our findings hint at an intriguing interplay between political inclinations and environmental behavior, showing that the connection between voting trends and energy consumption might be as intimate as a seashell and the ocean. While the exact causation behind this correlation eludes us for now, our research opens up new avenues for exploration, much like a treasure map just waiting to be discovered.

In conclusion, our study sheds light on an unexpected connection, proving yet again that the world of social and environmental dynamics is full of delightful surprises, much like a beachcomber stumbling upon a rare seashell. So next time you think about voting or fossil fuels, remember: they may be more interconnected than you think, just like a good ol' dad joke and an eye roll.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we navigate the choppy waters of political analysis and environmental scrutiny, it's often difficult to predict the strange and wonderful connections that may arise. Just like trying to figure out the punchline to a dad joke - you never quite know where it's headed.
In the context of U.S. presidential elections, the state of Maine has often been discussed for its distinctive voting patterns, not unlike a lobster with a penchant for blueberries - surprising, but undeniably ingrained in its nature. On the other hand, the tropical paradise of The Bahamas is renowned for its beautiful sandy beaches and crystal-clear waters, making it seem light years away from the rugged coastlines of Maine. Yet, as we delved into our research, we were about to uncover a connection more unexpected than a coconut falling from a palm tree at the stroke of midnight.
Our investigation set out to explore the curious link between the votes cast for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the consumption of fossil fuels in The Bahamas. This correlation seemed about as plausible as a flamingo trying to navigate a blizzard, but our data-driven approach unveiled a far more robust association than we ever anticipated.
As we sifted through the data like a treasure hunter on a quest for gold doubloons, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient, leaving us scratching our heads more than a cat with an itch. The statistical significance of our findings was as clear as the ocean waters off Nassau, with a p-value that said "this connection is not just the result of random chance" louder than a conch shell on the beach.
The implications of our findings are as noteworthy as a sighting of the Loch Ness Monster - they challenge conventional wisdom and beckon us to reevaluate our understanding of the intricate web of human behavior and environmental impact. Just as a beachgoer might stumble upon a message in a bottle, we stumbled upon a revelation that invites further exploration and consideration.
In this paper, we present our unexpected findings and invite our esteemed colleagues to join us in unpacking this uncharted territory. After all, unraveling the mysteries of political choices and environmental consequences is not unlike finding the perfect dad joke - it requires a keen eye for the unexpected and an appreciation for the delightfully absurd.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the tangled web of voter preferences and fossil fuel usage, our research team embarked on a journey more perplexing than trying to teach a squid how to play the trumpet. Our primary data sources included the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, from which we extracted information spanning the years 1980 to 2020 - a time frame more expansive than an octopus trying to embrace a shoal of fish.

First, we employed a rigorous approach to collect and clean the data, a process as meticulous as a hermit crab rearranging its collection of seashells. Once we had painstakingly organized the datasets, we proceeded to conduct a correlation analysis, which involved more number-crunching than a mathematician at a pi-eating contest.

To establish the strength and direction of the relationship between Democrat votes in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas, we utilized advanced statistical methods, including the venerable Pearson correlation coefficient. This analysis was as complex as untangling a particularly knotty fishing line, but with the help of sophisticated statistical software, we were able to navigate these treacherous waters with relative ease - much like a seasoned sailor would chart a course through a storm.

Furthermore, we employed time series analysis techniques to detect any long-term trends in the data, exploring temporal patterns more earnestly than a historian delving into ancient manuscripts. This approach allowed us to uncover subtle shifts in both voting behavior and energy usage, providing insights as unexpected as finding a toucan in a pine forest.

In addition to these methods, we conducted robustness checks and sensitivity analyses to ensure the reliability and stability of our findings, procedures more rigorous than a sandcastle standing up to the incoming tide. We also employed geographical mapping techniques to visually represent the spatial aspects of our data, creating visualizations as vibrant as a Caribbean sunset.

Throughout our methodology, we adhered to the highest standards of scientific inquiry, following protocols more diligently than a flamingo meticulously grooming its plumage. Our aim was to unearth a connection that, much like a dad joke, elicits both surprise and amusement, challenging conventional wisdom and inspiring further investigation.

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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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 0.9724069, r-squared of 0.9455752, 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]]
"Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected entanglement of U.S. presidential election voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas. While this research initially seems as unlikely as a polar bear in swim trunks, we discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between the two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from prominent sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our team set out to connect the dots--or in this case, the votes and the fuel.

Our analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9724069, which left us more baffled than a confused penguin in a sandstorm. We also secured a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2020, indicating that the relationship we've uncovered is definitely not just a fluke - unlike the ones you'd find on a Caribbean vacation.

The implications of this study, although as surprising as finding a mermaid in a Maine lobster trap, cannot be ignored. Our findings hint at an intriguing interplay between political inclinations and environmental behavior, showing that the connection between voting trends and energy consumption might be as intimate as a seashell and the ocean. While the exact causation behind this correlation eludes us for now, our research opens up new avenues for exploration, much like a treasure map just waiting to be discovered.

In conclusion, our study sheds light on an unexpected connection, proving yet again that the world of social and environmental dynamics is full of delightful surprises, much like a beachcomber stumbling upon a rare seashell. So next time you think about voting or fossil fuels, remember: they may be more interconnected than you think, just like a good ol' dad joke and an eye roll.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As we navigate the choppy waters of political analysis and environmental scrutiny, it's often difficult to predict the strange and wonderful connections that may arise. Just like trying to figure out the punchline to a dad joke - you never quite know where it's headed.
In the context of U.S. presidential elections, the state of Maine has often been discussed for its distinctive voting patterns, not unlike a lobster with a penchant for blueberries - surprising, but undeniably ingrained in its nature. On the other hand, the tropical paradise of The Bahamas is renowned for its beautiful sandy beaches and crystal-clear waters, making it seem light years away from the rugged coastlines of Maine. Yet, as we delved into our research, we were about to uncover a connection more unexpected than a coconut falling from a palm tree at the stroke of midnight.
Our investigation set out to explore the curious link between the votes cast for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the consumption of fossil fuels in The Bahamas. This correlation seemed about as plausible as a flamingo trying to navigate a blizzard, but our data-driven approach unveiled a far more robust association than we ever anticipated.
As we sifted through the data like a treasure hunter on a quest for gold doubloons, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient, leaving us scratching our heads more than a cat with an itch. The statistical significance of our findings was as clear as the ocean waters off Nassau, with a p-value that said "this connection is not just the result of random chance" louder than a conch shell on the beach.
The implications of our findings are as noteworthy as a sighting of the Loch Ness Monster - they challenge conventional wisdom and beckon us to reevaluate our understanding of the intricate web of human behavior and environmental impact. Just as a beachgoer might stumble upon a message in a bottle, we stumbled upon a revelation that invites further exploration and consideration.
In this paper, we present our unexpected findings and invite our esteemed colleagues to join us in unpacking this uncharted territory. After all, unraveling the mysteries of political choices and environmental consequences is not unlike finding the perfect dad joke - it requires a keen eye for the unexpected and an appreciation for the delightfully absurd.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The correlation analysis between the votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the fossil fuel use in The Bahamas revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9724069. This correlation was akin to finding a connection between lobsters and palm trees - unexpected, but undeniably present.

The r-squared value of 0.9455752 indicated that a whopping 94.6% of the variation in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas could be explained by the votes cast for the Democrat candidate in Maine. It was as if we had stumbled upon a message in a bottle with a clear explanation of this unusual relationship.

Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 confirmed the statistical significance of this correlation, more convincingly than a seagull's squawk at dawn. This strong evidence allowed us to rule out the possibility of this connection being a mere fluke, unlike a sand dollar washed up on the shore.

The results are encapsulated in Figure 1, which exhibits a scatterplot illustrating the robust relationship between the two variables. The figure serves as a visual testament to the unexpected correlation we uncovered, reminiscent of a snapshot capturing a flamingo in the midst of a snowstorm - improbable, yet undeniably real.

Overall, our findings illuminate a surprising linkage between voting behavior and environmental impact, challenging traditional perceptions and opening doors to further exploration. As we navigate these uncharted waters of research, we urge readers to approach this revelation with the same sense of wonder as stumbling upon a perfectly timed dad joke - unexpectedly delightful and worth a good chuckle.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected entanglement of U.S. presidential election voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas. While this research initially seems as unlikely as a polar bear in swim trunks, we discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between the two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from prominent sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our team set out to connect the dots--or in this case, the votes and the fuel.

Our analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9724069, which left us more baffled than a confused penguin in a sandstorm. We also secured a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2020, indicating that the relationship we've uncovered is definitely not just a fluke - unlike the ones you'd find on a Caribbean vacation.

The implications of this study, although as surprising as finding a mermaid in a Maine lobster trap, cannot be ignored. Our findings hint at an intriguing interplay between political inclinations and environmental behavior, showing that the connection between voting trends and energy consumption might be as intimate as a seashell and the ocean. While the exact causation behind this correlation eludes us for now, our research opens up new avenues for exploration, much like a treasure map just waiting to be discovered.

In conclusion, our study sheds light on an unexpected connection, proving yet again that the world of social and environmental dynamics is full of delightful surprises, much like a beachcomber stumbling upon a rare seashell. So next time you think about voting or fossil fuels, remember: they may be more interconnected than you think, just like a good ol' dad joke and an eye roll.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2015) investigated the voting patterns in Maine and established correlations with various socio-economic factors, including education levels, median household income, and prevalence of blueberry festivals. However, their study stopped short of uncovering any connection to tropical island fuel consumption, leaving a gap in the scholarship wider than a shark's grin.
Doe and Jones (2018) conducted a comprehensive analysis of fossil fuel consumption in small island nations, delving into the complexities of energy infrastructure, economic dependencies, and the allure of oceanfront sunsets. While their work painted a vivid picture of energy dynamics in the tropics, they failed to make any reference to a cold northeastern state's voting preferences, leaving us more puzzled than a polar bear trying to find a snow cone stand.
In "The Energy Paradox: From Fossil Fuels to Solar Power" by Green (2017), the author explores the intricate relationship between energy choices and environmental impact, shedding light on the complexities of human behavior in the face of climate change. While the book is a treasure trove of insights, it neglects to mention anything about the voting idiosyncrasies of the people of Maine, leaving us yearning for an explanation as tantalizing as a shell collector craving a rare conch.
Moving into the realm of fiction, "The Shell Game" by Ocean (2005) offers a whimsical tale of anthropomorphic sea creatures navigating the challenges of ocean life. Although it does not directly touch on political voting or fuel consumption, the story's themes of unexpected connections and hidden truths resonate with our own surprising findings, much like a crab appreciating an unexpected clash of cymbals.
As we reflect on childhood influences, we recall the animated series "Captain Planet and the Planeteers," which instilled in many a young viewer a sense of environmental responsibility. The iconic show's messages about the power of collective action and the importance of protecting natural resources echo the themes of our study, reminding us that the ties between human behavior and environmental impact are as enduring as the show's catchy theme song - perhaps even with a pun or two.
In "SpongeBob SquarePants," the underwater adventures of a sea sponge and his friends may seem far removed from our research, but the show's playful exploration of marine life and its ecological themes serves as a lighthearted reminder of the interconnectedness of all living things. Moreover, SpongeBob's eternal optimism and resilience in the face of challenges inspire us to approach our unexpected findings with a similar buoyant spirit, much like a yellow sponge in a pineapple under the sea - unexpected, but undeniably intriguing.
Now, we wade deeper into the waters of our analysis, armed with a bevy of disparate sources that hint at the entanglement of Maine votes and Bahamian fuel use, inviting us to untangle this enigmatic connection with the enthusiasm of a marine biologist discovering a new species - or a researcher unearthing a long-buried dad joke.

[[RESULTS]]
The correlation analysis between the votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the fossil fuel use in The Bahamas revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9724069. This correlation was akin to finding a connection between lobsters and palm trees - unexpected, but undeniably present.
The r-squared value of 0.9455752 indicated that a whopping 94.6% of the variation in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas could be explained by the votes cast for the Democrat candidate in Maine. It was as if we had stumbled upon a message in a bottle with a clear explanation of this unusual relationship.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 confirmed the statistical significance of this correlation, more convincingly than a seagull's squawk at dawn. This strong evidence allowed us to rule out the possibility of this connection being a mere fluke, unlike a sand dollar washed up on the shore.
The results are encapsulated in Figure 1, which exhibits a scatterplot illustrating the robust relationship between the two variables. The figure serves as a visual testament to the unexpected correlation we uncovered, reminiscent of a snapshot capturing a flamingo in the midst of a snowstorm - improbable, yet undeniably real.
Overall, our findings illuminate a surprising linkage between voting behavior and environmental impact, challenging traditional perceptions and opening doors to further exploration. As we navigate these uncharted waters of research, we urge readers to approach this revelation with the same sense of wonder as stumbling upon a perfectly timed dad joke - unexpectedly delightful and worth a good chuckle.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study sought to unravel the enigmatic connection between voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel utilization in The Bahamas, and we are pleased to report that our findings revealed a robust correlation. This correlation, with a coefficient of 0.9724069, was stronger than the gravitational pull of a black hole on a pizza delivery spaceship - a surprising and undeniable force at play.

Our results build upon the prior research highlighted in the literature review, adding a new layer of intricacy to the intricate web of social and environmental dynamics. The correlation coefficient we uncovered aligns with the work of Smith et al. (2015), which highlighted the multifaceted influences on voting patterns in Maine. It seems that the allure of blueberry festivals may be more closely intertwined with fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas than previously imagined, much like the unexpected pairing of lobster and tropical breezes.

Additionally, our findings support the overlooked connections hinted at by Doe and Jones (2018), who delved into the complexities of energy dynamics in small island nations. It appears that the allure of oceanfront sunsets and the allure of Maine voters may indeed share a common thread, much like a leaked pirate treasure map leading to a stash of unexpected connections.

Furthermore, our study adds a new twist to the work of Green (2017), as we uncover a direct, albeit perplexing, association between voting inclinations and environmental behavior. The boisterous echoes of Captain Planet and the Planeteers become even more poignant as we uncover the unexpected interplay between human choices and environmental impact - a revelation as surprising as finding a sand dollar in a Maine snowdrift.

As we unite the scholarly literature with our own findings, the intertwined themes of environmental responsibility and unexpected connections come into sharper focus, much like a masterfully crafted sandcastle on a Bahamian beach. Our results not only affirm the intriguing correlations but also emphasize the need for further exploration and rigorous analysis of this captivating relationship.

In essence, our study serves as a testament to the delightful surprises that permeate the world of social and environmental dynamics, akin to stumbling upon a perfectly timed dad joke - unexpected, undeniably captivating, and worthy of a hearty chuckle.

I will leave it to you to add a conclusion that is, no doubt, as satisfying as a dad joke at the end of a long research paper.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Maine and Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected entanglement of U.S. presidential election voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas. While this research initially seems as unlikely as a polar bear in swim trunks, we discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between the two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from prominent sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our team set out to connect the dots--or in this case, the votes and the fuel.

Our analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9724069, which left us more baffled than a confused penguin in a sandstorm. We also secured a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2020, indicating that the relationship we've uncovered is definitely not just a fluke - unlike the ones you'd find on a Caribbean vacation.

The implications of this study, although as surprising as finding a mermaid in a Maine lobster trap, cannot be ignored. Our findings hint at an intriguing interplay between political inclinations and environmental behavior, showing that the connection between voting trends and energy consumption might be as intimate as a seashell and the ocean. While the exact causation behind this correlation eludes us for now, our research opens up new avenues for exploration, much like a treasure map just waiting to be discovered.

In conclusion, our study sheds light on an unexpected connection, proving yet again that the world of social and environmental dynamics is full of delightful surprises, much like a beachcomber stumbling upon a rare seashell. So next time you think about voting or fossil fuels, remember: they may be more interconnected than you think, just like a good ol' dad joke and an eye roll.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As we navigate the choppy waters of political analysis and environmental scrutiny, it's often difficult to predict the strange and wonderful connections that may arise. Just like trying to figure out the punchline to a dad joke - you never quite know where it's headed.
In the context of U.S. presidential elections, the state of Maine has often been discussed for its distinctive voting patterns, not unlike a lobster with a penchant for blueberries - surprising, but undeniably ingrained in its nature. On the other hand, the tropical paradise of The Bahamas is renowned for its beautiful sandy beaches and crystal-clear waters, making it seem light years away from the rugged coastlines of Maine. Yet, as we delved into our research, we were about to uncover a connection more unexpected than a coconut falling from a palm tree at the stroke of midnight.
Our investigation set out to explore the curious link between the votes cast for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the consumption of fossil fuels in The Bahamas. This correlation seemed about as plausible as a flamingo trying to navigate a blizzard, but our data-driven approach unveiled a far more robust association than we ever anticipated.
As we sifted through the data like a treasure hunter on a quest for gold doubloons, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient, leaving us scratching our heads more than a cat with an itch. The statistical significance of our findings was as clear as the ocean waters off Nassau, with a p-value that said "this connection is not just the result of random chance" louder than a conch shell on the beach.
The implications of our findings are as noteworthy as a sighting of the Loch Ness Monster - they challenge conventional wisdom and beckon us to reevaluate our understanding of the intricate web of human behavior and environmental impact. Just as a beachgoer might stumble upon a message in a bottle, we stumbled upon a revelation that invites further exploration and consideration.
In this paper, we present our unexpected findings and invite our esteemed colleagues to join us in unpacking this uncharted territory. After all, unraveling the mysteries of political choices and environmental consequences is not unlike finding the perfect dad joke - it requires a keen eye for the unexpected and an appreciation for the delightfully absurd.

[[RESULTS]]
The correlation analysis between the votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the fossil fuel use in The Bahamas revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9724069. This correlation was akin to finding a connection between lobsters and palm trees - unexpected, but undeniably present.
The r-squared value of 0.9455752 indicated that a whopping 94.6% of the variation in fossil fuel use in The Bahamas could be explained by the votes cast for the Democrat candidate in Maine. It was as if we had stumbled upon a message in a bottle with a clear explanation of this unusual relationship.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 confirmed the statistical significance of this correlation, more convincingly than a seagull's squawk at dawn. This strong evidence allowed us to rule out the possibility of this connection being a mere fluke, unlike a sand dollar washed up on the shore.
The results are encapsulated in Figure 1, which exhibits a scatterplot illustrating the robust relationship between the two variables. The figure serves as a visual testament to the unexpected correlation we uncovered, reminiscent of a snapshot capturing a flamingo in the midst of a snowstorm - improbable, yet undeniably real.
Overall, our findings illuminate a surprising linkage between voting behavior and environmental impact, challenging traditional perceptions and opening doors to further exploration. As we navigate these uncharted waters of research, we urge readers to approach this revelation with the same sense of wonder as stumbling upon a perfectly timed dad joke - unexpectedly delightful and worth a good chuckle.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has unveiled a correlation between the votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Maine and the fossil fuel use in The Bahamas that is stronger than the gravitational pull on a dad's socks when he mows the lawn. The substantial correlation coefficient and r-squared value highlight the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly distant phenomena, much like realizing that a coconut and a pineapple are more alike than different - just like a good dad joke and a groan-worthy punchline.

These findings raise intriguing questions about the intricate dance between political choices and environmental consequences, challenging our perceptions in a manner akin to realizing that a sea turtle and a terrapin aren't the same thing. The statistical significance of our results, expressed in a p-value as clear as a shipwreck in shallow waters, makes it clear that this correlation is as real as a seashell you find in your pocket after a day at the beach – surprising, but definitely not a fluke.

As we tie the proverbial bow on this research, we assert with the confidence of a dad in his favorite recliner: no further research is needed in this area. Our findings not only invite us to rethink the connections between political preferences and environmental behavior but also serve as a reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected relationships can be more real than a unicorn riding a tandem bike.

So, as we embark on further studies and explorations in the realm of social and environmental dynamics, let's approach them with the same sense of anticipation as waiting for the punchline of a dad joke - because just like a good punchline, the next fascinating revelation might just be around the corner.

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 Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Ecotrends

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 Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Environmental Economics and Political Paradoxes

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 Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use with an abstract of In this study, we delve into the unexpected entanglement of U.S. presidential election voting patterns in Maine and fossil fuel consumption in The Bahamas. While this research initially seems as unlikely as a polar bear in swim trunks, we discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between the two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Utilizing data from prominent sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our team set out to connect the dots--or in this case, the votes and the fuel.
Our analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9724069, which left us more baffled than a confused penguin in a sandstorm. We also secured a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2020, indicating that the relationship we've uncovered is definitely not just a fluke - unlike the ones you'd find on a Caribbean vacation.
The implications of this study, although as surprising as finding a mermaid in a Maine lobster trap, cannot be ignored. Our findings hint at an intriguing interplay between political inclinations and environmental behavior, showing that the connection between voting trends and energy consumption might be as intimate as a seashell and the ocean. While the exact causation behind this correlation eludes us for now, our research opens up new avenues for exploration, much like a treasure map just waiting to be discovered.
In conclusion, our study sheds light on an unexpected connection, proving yet again that the world of social and environmental dynamics is full of delightful surprises, much like a beachcomber stumbling upon a rare seashell. So next time you think about voting or fossil fuels, remember: they may be more interconnected than you think, just like a good ol' dad joke and an eye roll.

ChatGPT:

Maine Votes, fossil fuel consumption, U.S. presidential election voting patterns, Maine, The Bahamas, correlation between voting trends and energy consumption, political inclinations and environmental behavior, Democrat support, fossil fuel use, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, p-value, 1980-2020, social and environmental dynamics.

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

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

Correlation r = 0.9724069 (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 = 0.9455752 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Maine) over the 11 years from 1980 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.4E-7.^Show 0.0000005417140202462846000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.97 in 5.4E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,845,992 random variables^Note You don't actually need 1 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, ^Note 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.

[ 0.89, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	1980	1984	1988	1992	1996	2000	2004	2008	2012	2016	2020
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Maine (Total votes)	220974	214515	243569	263420	312788	319951	396842	421923	401306	357735	435072
Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas (Billion kWh)	0.799	0.814	0.855	1.095	1.213	1.565	1.7947	2.05	1.786	1.848	1.99387

Why this works

Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple^Note 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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([220974,214515,243569,263420,312788,319951,396842,421923,401306,357735,435072,])
array_2 = np.array([0.799,0.814,0.855,1.095,1.213,1.565,1.7947,2.05,1.786,1.848,1.99387,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Maine"
array_2_name = "Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas"

# 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. ^Note Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Maine
Line chart for only Fossil fuel use in The Bahamas
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Maine Votes and Bahama Breezes: Uncovering the Surprising Link between Democrat Support and Fossil Fuel Use

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

You're a rater extraordinaire!

Correlation ID: 4704 · Black Variable ID: 25986 · Red Variable ID: 24035


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: