about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,647 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and the second variable is Votes for Republican Senators in Illinois.  The chart goes from 1980 to 1986, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the skies cleared, so did the Republican votes. It seems the GOP lost their 'air' of support in the midst of cleaner politics. It's like they say, when the pollution's down, the re-election's in jeopardy. It must be a gas to see how environmental changes can lead to political ones.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image with the style of a Discovery magazine cover, depicting a scene of a clear blue sky over Carbondale, Illinois. In the foreground, there is an empty ballot box labeled "Republican votes for Senators," symbolizing the dwindling support for the GOP. The connection between the improved air quality and the decrease in Republican votes is evident as the pollution clears and the political landscape shifts. The image should focus on the contrast between the pristine sky and the empty ballot box, emphasizing the shift in both environmental and political conditions. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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: a meme A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s A Discovery magazine cover image An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Psychedelic
ChatGPT: A Discovery 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 Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois, in the following situation: As the skies cleared, so did the Republican votes. It seems the GOP lost their 'air' of support in the midst of cleaner politics. It's like they say, when the pollution's down, the re-election's in jeopardy. It must be a gas to see how environmental changes can lead to political ones.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A clear blue sky hangs over Carbondale, Illinois, where a sense of fresh air fills the atmosphere. On the ground, a ballot box labeled "Republican votes for Senators" stands empty, symbolizing the dwindling support for the GOP. The connection between the improved air quality and the decrease in Republican votes is evident as the pollution clears and the political landscape shifts.

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 Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: A clear blue sky hangs over Carbondale, Illinois, where a sense of fresh air fills the atmosphere. On the ground, a ballot box labeled "Republican votes for Senators" stands empty, symbolizing the dwindling support for the GOP. The connection between the improved air quality and the decrease in Republican votes is evident as the pollution clears and the political landscape shifts. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image with the style of a Discovery magazine cover, depicting a scene of a clear blue sky over Carbondale, Illinois. In the foreground, there is an empty ballot box labeled "Republican votes for Senators," symbolizing the dwindling support for the GOP. The connection between the improved air quality and the decrease in Republican votes is evident as the pollution clears and the political landscape shifts. The image should focus on the contrast between the pristine sky and the empty ballot box, emphasizing the shift in both environmental and political conditions.

*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 Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois caused Republican votes for Senators in Illinois to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois

The Journal of Environmental Political Science

Jan 2024

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




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9997697 and p < 0.05 for 1980 to 1986.

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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As researchers, we are constantly seeking to shed light on the murky and often convoluted relationships between various societal and environmental factors. And what could be murkier than the thick smog blanketing our cities, right? Our current study takes us on a whimsical journey through the tangled web of air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and the Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. If you thought determining the quantum state of a particle was complex, just wait until you dig into the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables.

Now, let's clear the air, shall we? Our investigation into this seemingly bizarre relationship was sparked by a confluence of factors – from the pungent aroma of exhaust fumes to the seemingly inexplicable voting patterns. As we set out on our research expedition, armed with statistical tools and a healthy sense of humor (we needed it), we quickly realized that this wasn't just a puff of smoke. We unearthed a correlation so strong that it could make even the most devout non-believer in statistics raise an eyebrow, or two.

So, why are we giddy about air pollution and Republican votes in Illinois? Well, hold your breath – we found that the relationship between these two variables was as robust as a Kardashian-Jenner Instagram following. With a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it might as well be asking for a high five (r = 0.9997697), and a p-value as rare as a unicorn sighting (less than 0.05), we couldn't ignore the striking connection. It's as if Mother Nature herself was sending us smoke signals, urging us to uncover the hidden ties between pollution and political preferences.

But fear not, dear reader! This isn't just another dry academic paper, full of inscrutable jargon and mind-numbing tables. No, we promise you'll find more twists and turns in our findings than in a telenovela plot. Join us as we unravel the convergence of sooty skies and senatorial selections, and embark on a journey through the pollution politics of Carbondale, Illinois. Let's dive into the fog of factors and smog of statistics, and see if we can't clear the air on this surprising relationship once and for all.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we are constantly seeking to shed light on the murky and often convoluted relationships between various societal and environmental factors. And what could be murkier than the thick smog blanketing our cities, right? Our current study takes us on a whimsical journey through the tangled web of air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and the Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. If you thought determining the quantum state of a particle was complex, just wait until you dig into the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Now, let's clear the air, shall we? Our investigation into this seemingly bizarre relationship was sparked by a confluence of factors – from the pungent aroma of exhaust fumes to the seemingly inexplicable voting patterns. As we set out on our research expedition, armed with statistical tools and a healthy sense of humor (we needed it), we quickly realized that this wasn't just a puff of smoke. We unearthed a correlation so strong that it could make even the most devout non-believer in statistics raise an eyebrow, or two.
So, why are we giddy about air pollution and Republican votes in Illinois? Well, hold your breath – we found that the relationship between these two variables was as robust as a Kardashian-Jenner Instagram following. With a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it might as well be asking for a high five (r = 0.9997697), and a p-value as rare as a unicorn sighting (less than 0.05), we couldn't ignore the striking connection. It's as if Mother Nature herself was sending us smoke signals, urging us to uncover the hidden ties between pollution and political preferences.
But fear not, dear reader! This isn't just another dry academic paper, full of inscrutable jargon and mind-numbing tables. No, we promise you'll find more twists and turns in our findings than in a telenovela plot. Join us as we unravel the convergence of sooty skies and senatorial selections, and embark on a journey through the pollution politics of Carbondale, Illinois. Let's dive into the fog of factors and smog of statistics, and see if we can't clear the air on this surprising relationship once and for all.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The air of intrigue surrounding the entangled relationship between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois has drawn the attention of researchers and scholars alike. We dive headfirst into this unexpected nexus to uncover a treasure trove of insights, navigating through a sea of academic studies, real-world data, and perhaps a few wild goose chases. Our journey begins with a sober examination of the scholarly literature, but don't be surprised if we take a detour through the land of puns and pop culture references. Let's strap in for a ride that's bound to be as unpredictable as a weather forecast during a hurricane.

Smith and Doe (2015) analyzed the impact of air pollution on political leanings in urban areas, providing a framework for understanding how atmospheric contaminants could influence voting behavior. Jones et al. (2018) expanded on this work by delving into the psychological mechanisms underlying the relationship between environmental quality and political affiliations. These foundational studies laid the groundwork for our own investigation, but let's face it – we couldn't resist adding a touch of quirkiness to our academic pursuit.

Turning to non-fiction titles, "The Air We Breathe: A Comprehensive Analysis of Urban Air Quality" by Environmentalist Expert uncovers the intricacies of pollution dynamics, while "Political Puzzles: The Surprising Links Between Environmental Factors and Electoral Choices" by Political Analyst Extraordinaire offers a fresh perspective on the intersection of politics and environmental issues. Now, let's sprinkle in a dash of fiction for good measure. Who could forget "Smoke Signals and Senate Seats: A Political Mystery" by Bestselling Author, a page-turner filled with plot twists and turns more convoluted than a tangled ball of earphone wires?

But wait, there's more! We draw inspiration from the seemingly unrelated yet surprisingly relevant world of board games. "Smogopoly: The Game of Political Pollution" challenges players to navigate a city beset by smog while vying for political dominance, offering an offbeat yet oddly fitting parallel to our own scholarly odyssey. And let's not overlook "Pollutician: The Strategically Smoggy Card Game," where players vie for control of pollution policies while navigating the turbulent waters of political machinations. Who knew that board games could offer such a treasure trove of allegorical richness?

As we wade through this eclectic sea of literature, brace yourself for a rollercoaster of scholarly musings and irreverent musings. Our quest for understanding may be as befuddling as a Rubik's Cube, but rest assured, we'll sift through the dust and detritus to unveil the unexpected links between hazy atmospheres and electoral inclinations. Let the adventure begin!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 1980 to 1986

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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we are constantly seeking to shed light on the murky and often convoluted relationships between various societal and environmental factors. And what could be murkier than the thick smog blanketing our cities, right? Our current study takes us on a whimsical journey through the tangled web of air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and the Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. If you thought determining the quantum state of a particle was complex, just wait until you dig into the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Now, let's clear the air, shall we? Our investigation into this seemingly bizarre relationship was sparked by a confluence of factors – from the pungent aroma of exhaust fumes to the seemingly inexplicable voting patterns. As we set out on our research expedition, armed with statistical tools and a healthy sense of humor (we needed it), we quickly realized that this wasn't just a puff of smoke. We unearthed a correlation so strong that it could make even the most devout non-believer in statistics raise an eyebrow, or two.
So, why are we giddy about air pollution and Republican votes in Illinois? Well, hold your breath – we found that the relationship between these two variables was as robust as a Kardashian-Jenner Instagram following. With a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it might as well be asking for a high five (r = 0.9997697), and a p-value as rare as a unicorn sighting (less than 0.05), we couldn't ignore the striking connection. It's as if Mother Nature herself was sending us smoke signals, urging us to uncover the hidden ties between pollution and political preferences.
But fear not, dear reader! This isn't just another dry academic paper, full of inscrutable jargon and mind-numbing tables. No, we promise you'll find more twists and turns in our findings than in a telenovela plot. Join us as we unravel the convergence of sooty skies and senatorial selections, and embark on a journey through the pollution politics of Carbondale, Illinois. Let's dive into the fog of factors and smog of statistics, and see if we can't clear the air on this surprising relationship once and for all.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the intriguing relationship between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois, we employed an eclectic mix of research methods that would have made even Sherlock Holmes raise an amused eyebrow. Our data collection process involved a delightful scavenger hunt through the digital archives of the Environmental Protection Agency, the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, and the Harvard Dataverse. Picture us as digital archaeologists, unearthing hidden treasures in the form of data sets and statistical gems.

Drawing upon historical data from the years 1980 to 1986, we ventured into the vast wilderness of the internet, wielding virtual machetes to cut through the dense undergrowth of information. With each keystroke, we plundered the digital depths, seeking out air quality data from Carbondale, Illinois, and the detailed breakdown of Republican votes for Senators in the state. Our expedition through cyberspace was not for the faint of heart, but we emerged victorious, armed with a formidable array of numbers, figures, and percentages.

Once we had amassed our bountiful collection of data, we donned our metaphorical lab coats and dove headfirst into the bubbling cauldron of statistical analysis. Harnessing the powers of correlation coefficients and p-values, we set out to unravel the tangled web of connections between air pollution and political affiliations. With an arsenal of statistical software at our disposal, we crafted intricate regression models and conducted elaborate hypothesis tests, akin to crafting a sophisticated potion in the alchemist's laboratory.

Our process of analysis was akin to unraveling a particularly complex mystery novel, with each variable and statistical test serving as a clue in the grand whodunit of pollution politics. We meticulously teased apart the threads of correlation, causation, and confounding factors, ensuring that our findings were as robust as a titanium-reinforced steel beam.

In summary, our methodology blended the tenacity of a bloodhound with the precision of a Swiss watch, resulting in a comprehensive analysis of the unexpected nexus between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. So, grab your magnifying glass and dust off your detective hat – it's time to unveil the astonishing findings of our research expedition into the smoggy underbelly of environmental and political interactions.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .

For the time period 1980 to 1986, you found a correlation 0.9997697, r-squared of 0.9995395, and p < 0.05.

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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As researchers, we are constantly seeking to shed light on the murky and often convoluted relationships between various societal and environmental factors. And what could be murkier than the thick smog blanketing our cities, right? Our current study takes us on a whimsical journey through the tangled web of air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and the Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. If you thought determining the quantum state of a particle was complex, just wait until you dig into the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Now, let's clear the air, shall we? Our investigation into this seemingly bizarre relationship was sparked by a confluence of factors – from the pungent aroma of exhaust fumes to the seemingly inexplicable voting patterns. As we set out on our research expedition, armed with statistical tools and a healthy sense of humor (we needed it), we quickly realized that this wasn't just a puff of smoke. We unearthed a correlation so strong that it could make even the most devout non-believer in statistics raise an eyebrow, or two.
So, why are we giddy about air pollution and Republican votes in Illinois? Well, hold your breath – we found that the relationship between these two variables was as robust as a Kardashian-Jenner Instagram following. With a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it might as well be asking for a high five (r = 0.9997697), and a p-value as rare as a unicorn sighting (less than 0.05), we couldn't ignore the striking connection. It's as if Mother Nature herself was sending us smoke signals, urging us to uncover the hidden ties between pollution and political preferences.
But fear not, dear reader! This isn't just another dry academic paper, full of inscrutable jargon and mind-numbing tables. No, we promise you'll find more twists and turns in our findings than in a telenovela plot. Join us as we unravel the convergence of sooty skies and senatorial selections, and embark on a journey through the pollution politics of Carbondale, Illinois. Let's dive into the fog of factors and smog of statistics, and see if we can't clear the air on this surprising relationship once and for all.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation into the connection between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois left us gasping for fresh air. Our analysis of the data from 1980 to 1986 revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9997697, indicating a relationship so strong, it's practically shouting from the rooftops. If statistics were a party, this correlation would be the one with the lampshade on its head, impossible to ignore.

Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9995395 emphasizes the near-perfect fit of the relationship between these two variables, leaving us marveling at the tightly woven fabric of environmental quality and political choices. The p-value of less than 0.05 adds the cherry on top of this statistical sundae, providing unequivocal evidence of a significant association between the smoggy skies of Carbondale and the ballot boxes of Illinois.

To visually illustrate the striking connection we uncovered, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that vividly captures the near-perfect relationship between air pollution levels and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. If this were a love story, it would be the kind that makes you believe in fate – or at least in the mystical powers of scientific inquiry.

In conclusion, our findings not only challenge traditional notions of causality, but also underscore the unexpected ways in which environmental variables can intersect with political dynamics. This research sets the stage for further exploration into the complex interplay between local air quality and electoral preferences, inviting fellow researchers to take a breath of fresh, yet thought-provoking, air and join us in uncovering the surprising links between pollution and politics.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The air of intrigue surrounding the entangled relationship between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois has drawn the attention of researchers and scholars alike. We dive headfirst into this unexpected nexus to uncover a treasure trove of insights, navigating through a sea of academic studies, real-world data, and perhaps a few wild goose chases. Our journey begins with a sober examination of the scholarly literature, but don't be surprised if we take a detour through the land of puns and pop culture references. Let's strap in for a ride that's bound to be as unpredictable as a weather forecast during a hurricane.
Smith and Doe (2015) analyzed the impact of air pollution on political leanings in urban areas, providing a framework for understanding how atmospheric contaminants could influence voting behavior. Jones et al. (2018) expanded on this work by delving into the psychological mechanisms underlying the relationship between environmental quality and political affiliations. These foundational studies laid the groundwork for our own investigation, but let's face it – we couldn't resist adding a touch of quirkiness to our academic pursuit.
Turning to non-fiction titles, "The Air We Breathe: A Comprehensive Analysis of Urban Air Quality" by Environmentalist Expert uncovers the intricacies of pollution dynamics, while "Political Puzzles: The Surprising Links Between Environmental Factors and Electoral Choices" by Political Analyst Extraordinaire offers a fresh perspective on the intersection of politics and environmental issues. Now, let's sprinkle in a dash of fiction for good measure. Who could forget "Smoke Signals and Senate Seats: A Political Mystery" by Bestselling Author, a page-turner filled with plot twists and turns more convoluted than a tangled ball of earphone wires?
But wait, there's more! We draw inspiration from the seemingly unrelated yet surprisingly relevant world of board games. "Smogopoly: The Game of Political Pollution" challenges players to navigate a city beset by smog while vying for political dominance, offering an offbeat yet oddly fitting parallel to our own scholarly odyssey. And let's not overlook "Pollutician: The Strategically Smoggy Card Game," where players vie for control of pollution policies while navigating the turbulent waters of political machinations. Who knew that board games could offer such a treasure trove of allegorical richness?
As we wade through this eclectic sea of literature, brace yourself for a rollercoaster of scholarly musings and irreverent musings. Our quest for understanding may be as befuddling as a Rubik's Cube, but rest assured, we'll sift through the dust and detritus to unveil the unexpected links between hazy atmospheres and electoral inclinations. Let the adventure begin!

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the connection between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois left us gasping for fresh air. Our analysis of the data from 1980 to 1986 revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9997697, indicating a relationship so strong, it's practically shouting from the rooftops. If statistics were a party, this correlation would be the one with the lampshade on its head, impossible to ignore.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9995395 emphasizes the near-perfect fit of the relationship between these two variables, leaving us marveling at the tightly woven fabric of environmental quality and political choices. The p-value of less than 0.05 adds the cherry on top of this statistical sundae, providing unequivocal evidence of a significant association between the smoggy skies of Carbondale and the ballot boxes of Illinois.
To visually illustrate the striking connection we uncovered, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that vividly captures the near-perfect relationship between air pollution levels and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. If this were a love story, it would be the kind that makes you believe in fate – or at least in the mystical powers of scientific inquiry.
In conclusion, our findings not only challenge traditional notions of causality, but also underscore the unexpected ways in which environmental variables can intersect with political dynamics. This research sets the stage for further exploration into the complex interplay between local air quality and electoral preferences, inviting fellow researchers to take a breath of fresh, yet thought-provoking, air and join us in uncovering the surprising links between pollution and politics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

In the discussion of our smoggy yet compelling investigation, it is crucial to acknowledge the light-hearted and unconventional elements that have flavored our academic pursuit. Our deep dive into the connection between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois has certainly been an adventure akin to navigating a peculiar board game with unexpected twists and turns.

Returning to our literature review, it's remarkable how seemingly unrelated influences, like games and fictional narratives, can bear relevance to our serious academic inquiry. Although these sources might appear as incongruous as a cat wearing a monocle, they have actually laid the groundwork for our own investigation. Remember, it's not all fun and games, but sometimes research can be.

As our findings supported prior research, especially Smith and Doe (2015) and Jones et al. (2018), we were pleasantly surprised to see a correlation coefficient that's practically holding up a neon sign, enthusiastically demonstrating a connection rivaling the closeness of best friends. The r-squared value, playing the role of the meticulous librarian, ensured that every piece of data found its rightful place in the narrative, resulting in a story of an almost unnaturally perfect fit.

The visual representation in Fig. 1 illuminates the undeniable relationship between air pollution levels and Republican votes, serving as the Mona Lisa of scatterplots—captivating, enigmatic, and prompting countless interpretations. If this were a movie, it would combine the suspense of a political thriller with the dramatic flair of a meteorological disaster film, leaving audiences spellbound by the unexpected union of environmental factors and political preferences.

So, as we continue on this scientific journey that's as unpredictable as a squirrel crossing the road, let's not discount the unconventional and amusing influences that have served as the veritable spices of our research dish. After all, research doesn't have to be a poker-faced affair; a sprinkle of humor can make the pursuit of knowledge as engaging as a stand-up comedy show.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must put on my most serious scientist face to add the conclusion to this paper.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. 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]]
"Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As researchers, we are constantly seeking to shed light on the murky and often convoluted relationships between various societal and environmental factors. And what could be murkier than the thick smog blanketing our cities, right? Our current study takes us on a whimsical journey through the tangled web of air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and the Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. If you thought determining the quantum state of a particle was complex, just wait until you dig into the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Now, let's clear the air, shall we? Our investigation into this seemingly bizarre relationship was sparked by a confluence of factors – from the pungent aroma of exhaust fumes to the seemingly inexplicable voting patterns. As we set out on our research expedition, armed with statistical tools and a healthy sense of humor (we needed it), we quickly realized that this wasn't just a puff of smoke. We unearthed a correlation so strong that it could make even the most devout non-believer in statistics raise an eyebrow, or two.
So, why are we giddy about air pollution and Republican votes in Illinois? Well, hold your breath – we found that the relationship between these two variables was as robust as a Kardashian-Jenner Instagram following. With a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it might as well be asking for a high five (r = 0.9997697), and a p-value as rare as a unicorn sighting (less than 0.05), we couldn't ignore the striking connection. It's as if Mother Nature herself was sending us smoke signals, urging us to uncover the hidden ties between pollution and political preferences.
But fear not, dear reader! This isn't just another dry academic paper, full of inscrutable jargon and mind-numbing tables. No, we promise you'll find more twists and turns in our findings than in a telenovela plot. Join us as we unravel the convergence of sooty skies and senatorial selections, and embark on a journey through the pollution politics of Carbondale, Illinois. Let's dive into the fog of factors and smog of statistics, and see if we can't clear the air on this surprising relationship once and for all.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the connection between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois left us gasping for fresh air. Our analysis of the data from 1980 to 1986 revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9997697, indicating a relationship so strong, it's practically shouting from the rooftops. If statistics were a party, this correlation would be the one with the lampshade on its head, impossible to ignore.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9995395 emphasizes the near-perfect fit of the relationship between these two variables, leaving us marveling at the tightly woven fabric of environmental quality and political choices. The p-value of less than 0.05 adds the cherry on top of this statistical sundae, providing unequivocal evidence of a significant association between the smoggy skies of Carbondale and the ballot boxes of Illinois.
To visually illustrate the striking connection we uncovered, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that vividly captures the near-perfect relationship between air pollution levels and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois. If this were a love story, it would be the kind that makes you believe in fate – or at least in the mystical powers of scientific inquiry.
In conclusion, our findings not only challenge traditional notions of causality, but also underscore the unexpected ways in which environmental variables can intersect with political dynamics. This research sets the stage for further exploration into the complex interplay between local air quality and electoral preferences, inviting fellow researchers to take a breath of fresh, yet thought-provoking, air and join us in uncovering the surprising links between pollution and politics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

As we wrap up our investigation into the enigmatic relationship between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in Illinois, we can't help but marvel at the unexpected twists and turns we've encountered in this whimsical journey. The correlation coefficient between these variables is so snug, it makes you wonder if they're sharing a cozy blanket during statistical slumber parties (r = 0.9997697). And let's not forget the r-squared value that fits like a tailored suit (0.9995395), leaving us in awe of the perfectly snug connection.

Our findings reveal a bond as strong as the adhesive properties of superglue, emphasizing the indisputable link between the hazy skies of Carbondale and the political preferences of its inhabitants. The p-value of less than 0.05 acts as the cherry on top, solidifying our evidence like the cherry atop a gravity-defying ice cream sundae.

So, what have we learned from this peculiar partnership between pollution and politics? Well, it seems that every breath we take is not just a hit '80s song, but also a potential political statement. As we bid adieu to this captivating conundrum, we assert that this research has shed as much light on the topic as a string of twinkling Christmas lights on a dark winter's night – no more research is needed in this area. Because as we researchers like to say, "When the data fits like a glove, it's time to push the statistical stop button!"


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 Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Political Science


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 Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Environmental Epiphanies and Political Pollutants


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 Pollution Politics: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Quality and Republican Senate Votes in Carbondale, Illinois with an abstract of In this groundbreaking study, we explore the unexpected link between air pollution levels in Carbondale, Illinois and Republican votes for Senators in the state of Illinois. Through meticulous analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient so close to 1, it's virtually waving at us (r = 0.9997697). With a p-value of less than 0.05 for the period from 1980 to 1986, the evidence of a relationship between the two seemingly disparate factors is impossible to ignore. Our findings provoke not only thought, but also gasps of surprise, as we delve into the intricate interplay between environmental factors and political preferences. Join us in unraveling this smoggy mystery and shining a spotlight on the unexpected ties between air quality and electoral choices.

ChatGPT:

Air pollution, Republican Senate votes, Carbondale, Illinois, pollution politics, environmental factors, air quality, Illinois Senators, correlation coefficient, EPA data, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, political preferences, electoral choices, smoggy connection

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Carbondale-Marion, IL
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois

Votes for Republican Senators in Illinois
Detailed data title: Percentage of votes cast for Federal Republican Senate candidates in Illinois
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Republican Senators in Illinois

Correlation r = 0.9997697 (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 = 0.9995395 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 100% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Illinois) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois) over the 3 years from 1980 through 1986.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.014. 0.0136623190372126750000000000
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 1 in 1.4% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 73 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 2 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 2 because we have two variables measured over a period of 3 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.

[ -1, 1 ] 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.
198019841986
Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois (Bad air quality days)7.309948.357355.57276
Votes for Republican Senators in Illinois (Percentage of votes)42.495348.211433.7423




Why this works

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




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([7.30994,8.35735,5.57276,])
array_2 = np.array([42.4953,48.2114,33.7423,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Carbondale, Illinois"
array_2_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Illinois"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating skills are top-notch!


Correlation ID: 4647 · Black Variable ID: 20416 · Red Variable ID: 26380
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0