Report an error
Popularity of the first name Mason correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
UFO sightings in North Carolina | r=0.95 | 47yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Missouri | r=0.94 | 47yrs | Yes! |
UFO sightings in Michigan | r=0.94 | 47yrs | Yes! |
UFO sightings in New York | r=0.94 | 47yrs | Yes! |
UFO sightings in Tennessee | r=0.94 | 47yrs | No |
Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs | r=0.93 | 37yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Montana | r=0.92 | 47yrs | Yes! |
Yogurt consumption | r=0.92 | 32yrs | No |
Number of Las Vegas Hotel Room Check-Ins | r=0.91 | 39yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Iowa | r=0.91 | 47yrs | Yes! |
UFO sightings in Minnesota | r=0.91 | 47yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'zombies' | r=0.9 | 19yrs | No |
USA Population | r=0.9 | 48yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Maine | r=0.88 | 47yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Mason also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)