about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,693 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Milk consumption and the second variable is Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon.  The chart goes from 1990 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As people drank less milk, there was a decrease in the production of cereal crops. This led to a reduced need for agricultural land, so farmers in Brazil cleared fewer forests for farming, causing the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon to decrease. Looks like the Amazon wasn't the only one getting a little low on 'moo'-d!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image inspired by a TIME magazine cover depicting a group of people sitting around a campfire in the Brazilian Amazon. The individuals are holding reusable cups filled with milk, showcasing sustainability, while surrounded by tall, lush trees and colorful wildlife. The background illustrates the dense forest cover, symbolizing coexistence with milk consumption in the region. 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: Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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: Parallax art Cutsy art illustration Hyper-realistic A TIME magazine cover image Voxel art
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover image

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A group of people sitting around a campfire in the Brazilian Amazon, drinking milk from reusable cups, while surrounded by tall, lush trees and colorful wildlife. The forest cover is visible in the background, illustrating coexistence with milk consumption in the region.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: A group of people sitting around a campfire in the Brazilian Amazon, drinking milk from reusable cups, while surrounded by tall, lush trees and colorful wildlife. The forest cover is visible in the background, illustrating coexistence with milk consumption in the region. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image inspired by a TIME magazine cover depicting a group of people sitting around a campfire in the Brazilian Amazon. The individuals are holding reusable cups filled with milk, showcasing sustainability, while surrounded by tall, lush trees and colorful wildlife. The background illustrates the dense forest cover, symbolizing coexistence with milk consumption in the region.

*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 a decrease in Milk consumption caused Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon

Journal of Agricultural Ecological Studies

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 witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from USDA and Mongabay to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and p < 0.01 for 1990 to 2021.

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]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Milk consumption has been a topic of great interest in both nutritional and environmental spheres. While it is widely known that milk provides essential nutrients such as calcium and vitamin D, its potential impact on the environment is a lesser-explored frontier. In this study, we delve into the quirkier side of dairy consumption, aiming to uncover the not-so-smooth relationship between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The goal? To cow-culate the impact, or should we say "moo-ltiply" the implications, of dairy production on one of the most biodiverse regions on Earth.

The Amazon rainforest, often referred to as the "lungs of the Earth," is a critical ecosystem at the forefront of conservation efforts. Meanwhile, milk consumption continues to be a staple in the diets of many individuals worldwide. As we venture into this study, we are faced with a rather milky predicament: could the innocent act of sipping on a latte or indulging in a cheese platter be, in some way, linked to the gradual decline of forest cover in the Amazon? It's time to separate the curds from the whey and examine this correlation with a scientifically discerning eye.

Our research is not mere dairy-dreaming pondering. We embarked on this investigation armed with a stack of data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the reputable environmental platform, Mongabay. Armed with our statistical tools and a healthy dose of curiosity, we set out to churn through the numbers and unearth any potential patterns. Our findings revealed a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, leaving us feeling rather "moo-ved" by the strength of this association. Furthermore, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, the evidence suggests that there might be something more than just lactose stirring up the Amazonian forests.

As we embark on this milky quest, it is important to acknowledge the tongue-in-cheek nature of investigating dairy's influence on the environment. However, behind the playful puns and the light-hearted humor lies a serious, impactful question: is our love for dairy products inadvertently contributing to the deforestation of the Amazon? Our study aims to not only unpack this peculiar connection but also to inform discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of the invaluable Amazon rainforest. With a statistical lens, a touch of whimsy, and a deep-rooted commitment to scientific inquiry, we dive into the captivating realm of milk, forests, and everything in between. So, grab a glass of milk, take a seat, and let's embark on this utterly intriguing journey together.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. 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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Milk consumption has been a topic of great interest in both nutritional and environmental spheres. While it is widely known that milk provides essential nutrients such as calcium and vitamin D, its potential impact on the environment is a lesser-explored frontier. In this study, we delve into the quirkier side of dairy consumption, aiming to uncover the not-so-smooth relationship between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The goal? To cow-culate the impact, or should we say "moo-ltiply" the implications, of dairy production on one of the most biodiverse regions on Earth.
The Amazon rainforest, often referred to as the "lungs of the Earth," is a critical ecosystem at the forefront of conservation efforts. Meanwhile, milk consumption continues to be a staple in the diets of many individuals worldwide. As we venture into this study, we are faced with a rather milky predicament: could the innocent act of sipping on a latte or indulging in a cheese platter be, in some way, linked to the gradual decline of forest cover in the Amazon? It's time to separate the curds from the whey and examine this correlation with a scientifically discerning eye.
Our research is not mere dairy-dreaming pondering. We embarked on this investigation armed with a stack of data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the reputable environmental platform, Mongabay. Armed with our statistical tools and a healthy dose of curiosity, we set out to churn through the numbers and unearth any potential patterns. Our findings revealed a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, leaving us feeling rather "moo-ved" by the strength of this association. Furthermore, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, the evidence suggests that there might be something more than just lactose stirring up the Amazonian forests.
As we embark on this milky quest, it is important to acknowledge the tongue-in-cheek nature of investigating dairy's influence on the environment. However, behind the playful puns and the light-hearted humor lies a serious, impactful question: is our love for dairy products inadvertently contributing to the deforestation of the Amazon? Our study aims to not only unpack this peculiar connection but also to inform discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of the invaluable Amazon rainforest. With a statistical lens, a touch of whimsy, and a deep-rooted commitment to scientific inquiry, we dive into the captivating realm of milk, forests, and everything in between. So, grab a glass of milk, take a seat, and let's embark on this utterly intriguing journey together.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In the wide body of literature surrounding environmental conservation, the impact of dairy consumption on forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon has, until recently, been a topic largely untouched. However, as our study delves into this unexpected connection, we find that the dearth of research in this area does not indicate a lack of importance. On the contrary, the uncanny relationship between milk consumption and deforestation in the Amazon has captured the attention of researchers and enthusiasts alike, leading to an assortment of unique perspectives and findings.

We start our journey through the literature with Smith et al.'s seminal work "Dairy and Deforestation: Unraveling the Milky Mysteries" where the authors find compelling evidence linking dairy consumption to changes in land use patterns in the Amazon. The study provides a comprehensive analysis of historical dairy production data and deforestation rates, highlighting a correlation that is both surprising and thought-provoking. Building upon this, Doe's study "Creamy Conundrum: Exploring the Milky Way to Deforestation" further corroborates the notion that the demand for dairy products may have substantial implications for forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon.

As we leaf through the pages of environmental discourse, it becomes apparent that our investigation stands on the precipice of a dairy-scovery that carries profound implications. However, amidst the scholarly works, it is also important to acknowledge the influence of non-fiction literature that touches upon the fabric of our relationship with nature. Works such as "The Hidden Life of Trees" by Peter Wohlleben and "Eating Animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer serve as poignant reminders of the intricate web of connections between human behavior and the environment, laying the foundation for our understanding of the delicate balance between consumption and conservation.

Moreover, in the realm of fiction, the enigmatic allure of the Amazonian rainforest has inspired authors to weave tales of adventure and intrigue. Novels such as "The Lost City of Z" by David Grann and "State of Wonder" by Ann Patchett, while not directly addressing the correlation between milk consumption and deforestation, immerse readers in the captivating ambiance of this ecological treasure trove. Perhaps, nestled within the pages of these fictional narratives, lies a subtle nod to the complexity of human interaction with the Amazon, including the unsuspected role of dairy products.

In addition to literary works, it is worth noting the influence of board games that engage with themes of environmental conservation and resource management. Games like "Photosynthesis" and "EcoFluxx" offer a playful yet insightful perspective on the interconnectedness of ecosystems and human activities, prompting players to grapple with the consequences of their decisions on natural habitats. While these games do not directly address the dairy-deforestation dynamic, they underscore the broader discourse on sustainable practices and the repercussions of human behavior on the environment.

As we navigate this rather eclectic assortment of literature, it is evident that our investigation into the relationship between milk consumption and forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon is just one piece of a larger, interconnected puzzle. The amalgamation of scholarly inquiries, literary musings, and playful diversions lends depth and richness to our exploration, highlighting the multifaceted nature of human-environment interactions and the tantalizing layers of complexity that await our understanding.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Mongabay . You used data from 1990 to 2021

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]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Milk consumption has been a topic of great interest in both nutritional and environmental spheres. While it is widely known that milk provides essential nutrients such as calcium and vitamin D, its potential impact on the environment is a lesser-explored frontier. In this study, we delve into the quirkier side of dairy consumption, aiming to uncover the not-so-smooth relationship between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The goal? To cow-culate the impact, or should we say "moo-ltiply" the implications, of dairy production on one of the most biodiverse regions on Earth.
The Amazon rainforest, often referred to as the "lungs of the Earth," is a critical ecosystem at the forefront of conservation efforts. Meanwhile, milk consumption continues to be a staple in the diets of many individuals worldwide. As we venture into this study, we are faced with a rather milky predicament: could the innocent act of sipping on a latte or indulging in a cheese platter be, in some way, linked to the gradual decline of forest cover in the Amazon? It's time to separate the curds from the whey and examine this correlation with a scientifically discerning eye.
Our research is not mere dairy-dreaming pondering. We embarked on this investigation armed with a stack of data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the reputable environmental platform, Mongabay. Armed with our statistical tools and a healthy dose of curiosity, we set out to churn through the numbers and unearth any potential patterns. Our findings revealed a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, leaving us feeling rather "moo-ved" by the strength of this association. Furthermore, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, the evidence suggests that there might be something more than just lactose stirring up the Amazonian forests.
As we embark on this milky quest, it is important to acknowledge the tongue-in-cheek nature of investigating dairy's influence on the environment. However, behind the playful puns and the light-hearted humor lies a serious, impactful question: is our love for dairy products inadvertently contributing to the deforestation of the Amazon? Our study aims to not only unpack this peculiar connection but also to inform discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of the invaluable Amazon rainforest. With a statistical lens, a touch of whimsy, and a deep-rooted commitment to scientific inquiry, we dive into the captivating realm of milk, forests, and everything in between. So, grab a glass of milk, take a seat, and let's embark on this utterly intriguing journey together.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To tackle this dairy-dilemma, we employed an eclectic mix of statistical methods and data wrangling techniques that could make even the most stoic statistician crack a smile. Our approach involved an extensive combing of publicly available data, mainly sourced from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the renowned environmental platform, Mongabay. We figured, why cry over spilled milk when you can laugh over scattered datasets instead?

First off, we wrangled and curated datasets covering the period from 1990 to 2021, carefully ensuring that the data was as fresh as a newly opened carton of milk. This involved fetching vast quantities of information related to milk consumption and environmental metrics, balancing our delicate database like a masterful juggler blending essential variables. After all, a good statistical study is like a finely crafted cheese, skillfully combined for maximum impact.

With our data firmly in hand, we then endeavored to perform a series of robust statistical analyses. We utilized various techniques such as correlation analysis, regression modeling, and time series analysis to milk the data for all its worth. We navigated the statistical landscape with the agility of a graceful dairy cow—carefully avoiding statistical pitfalls and cowculating measures of association with precision.

Furthermore, we acknowledged that lurking beneath the surface of our data were potential confounders and lurking variables, much like the unexpected lumps in a seemingly smooth custard. To address this, we leveraged advanced statistical models to control for relevant factors, ensuring that our analyses were as clean as a fresh batch of pasteurized milk.

Lastly, we embraced the ethos that no statistical study is complete without a tinge of uncertainty. To this end, we meticulously calculated standard errors, confidence intervals, and delved into the whimsical world of hypothesis testing. We ensured that our conclusions were as likely to be true as the odds of finding an albino cow in the middle of Times Square—exceptionally rare.

In sum, our methodology was concocted with the flair of a seasoned chef crafting a delectable soufflé—blending data, statistical techniques, and a sprinkle of scientific humor to study the curiously complex relationship between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Mongabay .

For the time period 1990 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9372464, r-squared of 0.8784308, 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]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Milk consumption has been a topic of great interest in both nutritional and environmental spheres. While it is widely known that milk provides essential nutrients such as calcium and vitamin D, its potential impact on the environment is a lesser-explored frontier. In this study, we delve into the quirkier side of dairy consumption, aiming to uncover the not-so-smooth relationship between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The goal? To cow-culate the impact, or should we say "moo-ltiply" the implications, of dairy production on one of the most biodiverse regions on Earth.
The Amazon rainforest, often referred to as the "lungs of the Earth," is a critical ecosystem at the forefront of conservation efforts. Meanwhile, milk consumption continues to be a staple in the diets of many individuals worldwide. As we venture into this study, we are faced with a rather milky predicament: could the innocent act of sipping on a latte or indulging in a cheese platter be, in some way, linked to the gradual decline of forest cover in the Amazon? It's time to separate the curds from the whey and examine this correlation with a scientifically discerning eye.
Our research is not mere dairy-dreaming pondering. We embarked on this investigation armed with a stack of data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the reputable environmental platform, Mongabay. Armed with our statistical tools and a healthy dose of curiosity, we set out to churn through the numbers and unearth any potential patterns. Our findings revealed a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, leaving us feeling rather "moo-ved" by the strength of this association. Furthermore, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, the evidence suggests that there might be something more than just lactose stirring up the Amazonian forests.
As we embark on this milky quest, it is important to acknowledge the tongue-in-cheek nature of investigating dairy's influence on the environment. However, behind the playful puns and the light-hearted humor lies a serious, impactful question: is our love for dairy products inadvertently contributing to the deforestation of the Amazon? Our study aims to not only unpack this peculiar connection but also to inform discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of the invaluable Amazon rainforest. With a statistical lens, a touch of whimsy, and a deep-rooted commitment to scientific inquiry, we dive into the captivating realm of milk, forests, and everything in between. So, grab a glass of milk, take a seat, and let's embark on this utterly intriguing journey together.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our statistical analysis left us utterly "moo-ved" by the robust correlation we uncovered between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon from 1990 to 2021. The analysis revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8784308, suggesting that approximately 87.84% of the variation in remaining forest cover can be explained by the variation in milk consumption. Now, that's udderly remarkable!

As seen in Fig. 1, the scatterplot visually depicts the tight relationship between milk consumption and the declining forest cover, leaving us wondering whether the dairy industry is having a "grater" impact than we previously thought.

Despite the lightheartedness of our dairy-infused puns, the significance of our findings should not be "udder"-estimated. With a p-value of less than 0.01, our results provide overwhelming evidence to support the existence of a noteworthy link between milk consumption and deforestation in the Amazon. This correlation may just "milk-shake" our understanding of the environmental impact of dairy production.

These findings prompt further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon. Could it be the production processes, the transportation of dairy products, or perhaps even the cow emissions that are contributing to the reduction in forest cover in the Amazon? Moreover, the implications of this discovery call for a "dairy-ly" urgent consideration of sustainable dairy practices and their potential effects on the preservation of the Amazon rainforest.

In conclusion, our study reveals a compelling association between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon, invoking critical discussions on eco-friendly dairy choices and the conservation of our planet's vital ecosystems. It's clear that there's much "moo-re" to explore in this creamy conundrum, and we are eager to "milk" every bit of insight from this unexpected correlation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In the wide body of literature surrounding environmental conservation, the impact of dairy consumption on forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon has, until recently, been a topic largely untouched. However, as our study delves into this unexpected connection, we find that the dearth of research in this area does not indicate a lack of importance. On the contrary, the uncanny relationship between milk consumption and deforestation in the Amazon has captured the attention of researchers and enthusiasts alike, leading to an assortment of unique perspectives and findings.
We start our journey through the literature with Smith et al.'s seminal work "Dairy and Deforestation: Unraveling the Milky Mysteries" where the authors find compelling evidence linking dairy consumption to changes in land use patterns in the Amazon. The study provides a comprehensive analysis of historical dairy production data and deforestation rates, highlighting a correlation that is both surprising and thought-provoking. Building upon this, Doe's study "Creamy Conundrum: Exploring the Milky Way to Deforestation" further corroborates the notion that the demand for dairy products may have substantial implications for forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon.
As we leaf through the pages of environmental discourse, it becomes apparent that our investigation stands on the precipice of a dairy-scovery that carries profound implications. However, amidst the scholarly works, it is also important to acknowledge the influence of non-fiction literature that touches upon the fabric of our relationship with nature. Works such as "The Hidden Life of Trees" by Peter Wohlleben and "Eating Animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer serve as poignant reminders of the intricate web of connections between human behavior and the environment, laying the foundation for our understanding of the delicate balance between consumption and conservation.
Moreover, in the realm of fiction, the enigmatic allure of the Amazonian rainforest has inspired authors to weave tales of adventure and intrigue. Novels such as "The Lost City of Z" by David Grann and "State of Wonder" by Ann Patchett, while not directly addressing the correlation between milk consumption and deforestation, immerse readers in the captivating ambiance of this ecological treasure trove. Perhaps, nestled within the pages of these fictional narratives, lies a subtle nod to the complexity of human interaction with the Amazon, including the unsuspected role of dairy products.
In addition to literary works, it is worth noting the influence of board games that engage with themes of environmental conservation and resource management. Games like "Photosynthesis" and "EcoFluxx" offer a playful yet insightful perspective on the interconnectedness of ecosystems and human activities, prompting players to grapple with the consequences of their decisions on natural habitats. While these games do not directly address the dairy-deforestation dynamic, they underscore the broader discourse on sustainable practices and the repercussions of human behavior on the environment.
As we navigate this rather eclectic assortment of literature, it is evident that our investigation into the relationship between milk consumption and forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon is just one piece of a larger, interconnected puzzle. The amalgamation of scholarly inquiries, literary musings, and playful diversions lends depth and richness to our exploration, highlighting the multifaceted nature of human-environment interactions and the tantalizing layers of complexity that await our understanding.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our statistical analysis left us utterly "moo-ved" by the robust correlation we uncovered between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon from 1990 to 2021. The analysis revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8784308, suggesting that approximately 87.84% of the variation in remaining forest cover can be explained by the variation in milk consumption. Now, that's udderly remarkable!
As seen in Fig. 1, the scatterplot visually depicts the tight relationship between milk consumption and the declining forest cover, leaving us wondering whether the dairy industry is having a "grater" impact than we previously thought.
Despite the lightheartedness of our dairy-infused puns, the significance of our findings should not be "udder"-estimated. With a p-value of less than 0.01, our results provide overwhelming evidence to support the existence of a noteworthy link between milk consumption and deforestation in the Amazon. This correlation may just "milk-shake" our understanding of the environmental impact of dairy production.
These findings prompt further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon. Could it be the production processes, the transportation of dairy products, or perhaps even the cow emissions that are contributing to the reduction in forest cover in the Amazon? Moreover, the implications of this discovery call for a "dairy-ly" urgent consideration of sustainable dairy practices and their potential effects on the preservation of the Amazon rainforest.
In conclusion, our study reveals a compelling association between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon, invoking critical discussions on eco-friendly dairy choices and the conservation of our planet's vital ecosystems. It's clear that there's much "moo-re" to explore in this creamy conundrum, and we are eager to "milk" every bit of insight from this unexpected correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study churned out some "dairy-sruptive" findings that surely left us feeling utterly "moo-ved." The robust correlation we uncovered between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon indeed validates the previous research, leaving us to ponder the implications and potential snags in this creamy conundrum.

The literature has long hinted at the milky mysteries we sought to explore. It's intriguing how Smith et al.'s "Dairy and Deforestation: Unraveling the Milky Mysteries" and Doe's "Creamy Conundrum: Exploring the Milky Way to Deforestation" led the charge in uncovering the surprising link between dairy consumption and changes in land use patterns in the Amazon. As we move past these literary treasures, their findings have been corroborated and amplified by our study's resounding correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, proving that the dairy industry's impact on the Amazon forests is no "moo-t" point.

Our results support the notion that dairy consumption has "whiskered" away significant portions of the Amazon's forest cover over the years, highlighting a compelling narrative that demands careful consideration. The r-squared value of 0.8784308 suggests that a "moogo" proportion of the variation in remaining forest cover can be explained by variations in milk consumption, emphasizing the undeniable impact of dairy practices on this delicate ecosystem.

Furthermore, the statistical significance of our findings, with a p-value of less than 0.01, dispels any notion of coincidence, pressing us to "moo-ve" forward with the urgent need to address the environmental impact of dairy production. While tempted to bask in our study's "dairylicious" results, we must also recognize the pressing need to investigate the underlying mechanisms driving this correlation. Perhaps it is not just the gallons of milk, but the entire dairy production process, or even the way cows "udder" their intentions, that holds the clue to this perplexing link.

As we "moo-se" over the implications, it's clear that this study has "herd" us into a new era of understanding the delicate dance between dairy consumption and the preservation of our planet's vital ecosystems. Our findings open the gate to an "udder"-standing of dairy's role in the environmental narrative, urging stakeholders to embark on a "mooving" journey towards more sustainable practices and policies that "milk" every bit of insight from this unexpected correlation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Milk consumption and Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]
"Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Milk consumption has been a topic of great interest in both nutritional and environmental spheres. While it is widely known that milk provides essential nutrients such as calcium and vitamin D, its potential impact on the environment is a lesser-explored frontier. In this study, we delve into the quirkier side of dairy consumption, aiming to uncover the not-so-smooth relationship between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The goal? To cow-culate the impact, or should we say "moo-ltiply" the implications, of dairy production on one of the most biodiverse regions on Earth.
The Amazon rainforest, often referred to as the "lungs of the Earth," is a critical ecosystem at the forefront of conservation efforts. Meanwhile, milk consumption continues to be a staple in the diets of many individuals worldwide. As we venture into this study, we are faced with a rather milky predicament: could the innocent act of sipping on a latte or indulging in a cheese platter be, in some way, linked to the gradual decline of forest cover in the Amazon? It's time to separate the curds from the whey and examine this correlation with a scientifically discerning eye.
Our research is not mere dairy-dreaming pondering. We embarked on this investigation armed with a stack of data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the reputable environmental platform, Mongabay. Armed with our statistical tools and a healthy dose of curiosity, we set out to churn through the numbers and unearth any potential patterns. Our findings revealed a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, leaving us feeling rather "moo-ved" by the strength of this association. Furthermore, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, the evidence suggests that there might be something more than just lactose stirring up the Amazonian forests.
As we embark on this milky quest, it is important to acknowledge the tongue-in-cheek nature of investigating dairy's influence on the environment. However, behind the playful puns and the light-hearted humor lies a serious, impactful question: is our love for dairy products inadvertently contributing to the deforestation of the Amazon? Our study aims to not only unpack this peculiar connection but also to inform discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of the invaluable Amazon rainforest. With a statistical lens, a touch of whimsy, and a deep-rooted commitment to scientific inquiry, we dive into the captivating realm of milk, forests, and everything in between. So, grab a glass of milk, take a seat, and let's embark on this utterly intriguing journey together.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our statistical analysis left us utterly "moo-ved" by the robust correlation we uncovered between milk consumption and the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon from 1990 to 2021. The analysis revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9372464, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8784308, suggesting that approximately 87.84% of the variation in remaining forest cover can be explained by the variation in milk consumption. Now, that's udderly remarkable!
As seen in Fig. 1, the scatterplot visually depicts the tight relationship between milk consumption and the declining forest cover, leaving us wondering whether the dairy industry is having a "grater" impact than we previously thought.
Despite the lightheartedness of our dairy-infused puns, the significance of our findings should not be "udder"-estimated. With a p-value of less than 0.01, our results provide overwhelming evidence to support the existence of a noteworthy link between milk consumption and deforestation in the Amazon. This correlation may just "milk-shake" our understanding of the environmental impact of dairy production.
These findings prompt further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon. Could it be the production processes, the transportation of dairy products, or perhaps even the cow emissions that are contributing to the reduction in forest cover in the Amazon? Moreover, the implications of this discovery call for a "dairy-ly" urgent consideration of sustainable dairy practices and their potential effects on the preservation of the Amazon rainforest.
In conclusion, our study reveals a compelling association between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon, invoking critical discussions on eco-friendly dairy choices and the conservation of our planet's vital ecosystems. It's clear that there's much "moo-re" to explore in this creamy conundrum, and we are eager to "milk" every bit of insight from this unexpected correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our study has churned up some truly "moo-ving" findings that highlight the dairy-ous impact of milk consumption on the remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. The udderly robust correlation we've uncovered between these variables suggests that there's more to this creamy conundrum than meets the eye. Our results not only cheese the case for further exploration but also "whip" up a compelling argument for sustainable dairy practices.

These findings not only milk-splain the potential environmental implications of dairy production but also stir the pot when it comes to considering the bovine consequences of our consumption habits. It's time to "moo-ve" beyond conventional thinking and embrace discussions around eco-friendly dairy choices that can help "steer" us towards a greener, more sustainable future for the Amazon and beyond.

As much as we love grappling with the quirks of statistics and the unexpected connections they unveil, it's clear that the implications of this study are no laughing matter. Our findings point to the need for serious action and thoughtful consideration of the impact of dairy consumption on our planet's ecosystems. There's no need to cry over spilled milk, but there is an urgent need to ensure that our dairy choices don't come at the expense of the Amazon's precious forests.

In light of these compelling results, we are utterly convinced that no more research is needed in this area. The evidence is as clear as a glass of fresh milk – it's time to "moo-ve" forward towards sustainable dairy practices and a greener, more forest-friendly future. Let's tip our hats to the power of statistical inquiry and the unexpected insights it can yield, and let's milk this revelation for all it's worth. Cheers to a future where dairy and forests can coexist in harmony!


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 Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Agricultural Ecological Studies


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 Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Ethical Agriculture and Environmental Research (SEAER)


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 Got Milk? Exploring the Dairy-Accelerated DeforestHation in the Brazilian Amazon with an abstract of In this udderly interesting study, we mooo-ved beyond the conventional beliefs about milk consumption and its environmental impact to investigate the peculiar connection between milk consumption and remaining forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. Using data acquired from the USDA and Mongabay, we set out to shed light on this milk-terious correlation. Our analysis revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9372464 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 1990 to 2021, which may just skim the surface of this creamy enigma. These findings urge further exploration and raise the question: could the lactose in our dairy products be causing a stir in the Amazonian forests? This study aims to fuel discussions on sustainable dairy practices and the preservation of our beloved rainforests, all while milking the most out of statistical analyses.

ChatGPT:

milk consumption, environmental impact, deforestation, Brazilian Amazon, forest cover, USDA data, Mongabay data, correlation coefficient, p-value, sustainable dairy practices, rainforest preservation, statistical analysis

*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

Milk consumption
Detailed data title: Per capita consumption of Fluid beverage milk in the US
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with Milk consumption

Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon
Detailed data title: Estimated Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon
Source: Mongabay
See what else correlates with Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon

Correlation r = 0.9372464 (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 = 0.8784308 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 87.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Milk consumption) over the 32 years from 1990 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.9E-15. 0.0000000000000028734295824905
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 0.94 in 2.9E-13% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 348,016,184,594,740 random variables You don't actually need 348 trillion 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 31 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 31 because we have two variables measured over a period of 32 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.

[ 0.87, 0.97 ] 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.
19901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Milk consumption (Pounds per person)220218215210208205205201198197196192191188185185185183181181177173169164158155153149145141141134
Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon (Sq. KM)36920203680990366720036523103637410360835035901903576960355958035423203524100350593034842803458880343111034121003397810338616033732503365790335879033523703347800334191033369003330690332280033158503308310329855032901203279650




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([220,218,215,210,208,205,205,201,198,197,196,192,191,188,185,185,185,183,181,181,177,173,169,164,158,155,153,149,145,141,141,134,])
array_2 = np.array([3692020,3680990,3667200,3652310,3637410,3608350,3590190,3576960,3559580,3542320,3524100,3505930,3484280,3458880,3431110,3412100,3397810,3386160,3373250,3365790,3358790,3352370,3347800,3341910,3336900,3330690,3322800,3315850,3308310,3298550,3290120,3279650,])
array_1_name = "Milk consumption"
array_2_name = "Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon"

# 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 dedication to rating warms my heart!


Correlation ID: 1693 · Black Variable ID: 554 · Red Variable ID: 372
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0