about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,745 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton in Texas and the second variable is Total hydopower energy generated globally.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As GMO use in cotton in Texas increased, it led to the production of stronger, more resilient cotton fibers. These fibers were then used to create more efficient hydroelectric turbines worldwide, ultimately leading to an increase in total hydropower energy generated globally. It's a real power play that's sew good, it's ginning momentum and leaving us all in stitches!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a futuristic scene in which a vibrant cotton field in Texas stretches into the distance, bathed in the warm golden light of the setting sun. The cotton plants sway gently in the wind, giving an impression of movement and life within this serene landscape. Adjacent to the cotton field, a towering hydroelectric dam is depicted with powerful water turbines churning with energy. The scene should exude a sense of harmony between nature and technology, with an overall aesthetic that feels both modern and tranquil. 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: GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. 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: Symbolism Futuristic Cyberpunk Art nouveau Macabre
ChatGPT: Futuristic

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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vast Texas cotton field, towering cotton plants wave in the wind as the sun sets behind them, casting a golden glow. Along the edge of the field, a powerful hydroelectric dam churns with the energy of rushing water, generating electricity to power homes and businesses around the world.

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: [ Futuristic ] and depicting this scene: In a vast Texas cotton field, towering cotton plants wave in the wind as the sun sets behind them, casting a golden glow. Along the edge of the field, a powerful hydroelectric dam churns with the energy of rushing water, generating electricity to power homes and businesses around the world. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a futuristic scene in which a vibrant cotton field in Texas stretches into the distance, bathed in the warm golden light of the setting sun. The cotton plants sway gently in the wind, giving an impression of movement and life within this serene landscape. Adjacent to the cotton field, a towering hydroelectric dam is depicted with powerful water turbines churning with energy. The scene should exude a sense of harmony between nature and technology, with an overall aesthetic that feels both modern and tranquil.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

The Journal of Agronomic Anomalies

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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from USDA and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and p < 0.01 for 2000 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]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The world of agriculture and energy generation may seem disparate at first glance, but as we delve deeper into the complexities of their interplay, we often unearth surprising connections that leave us scratching our heads in bemusement. One such unlikely relationship that piqued our curiosity is the correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. While this duo may not be the first to spring to mind when thinking about interconnected phenomena, the data we have collected has indeed unveiled a compelling linkage that demands further investigation.

The use of GMOs in cotton cultivation has seen widespread adoption in Texas, with advancements in genetic engineering ushering in a new era of pest resistance, improved yield, and even fiber quality. Meanwhile, on the energy front, hydropower has long been harnessed as a renewable source of electricity, with its reliance on the natural flow of water making it a stalwart in the realm of sustainable energy. But could there be an undercurrent, so to speak, that links these two seemingly disparate elements? Our research aims to peel back the layers of this enigmatic connection and shed light on the potential implications it holds for both agriculture and energy production on a global scale.

As we take this journey into the labyrinth of agricultural and energy data, we invite the reader to join us in unraveling the tantalizing correlation that we have uncovered. We will navigate through statistical analyses, ponder the ramifications of this unusual link, and perhaps even unravel the thread that connects cotton's genetic makeup to the churning force of water's energy. So buckle up and prepare to explore the unexpected ties that lurk beneath the surface of these multifaceted domains – after all, it's not every day we get to pair cotton and hydropower in the same sentence, let alone in a research paper.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The world of agriculture and energy generation may seem disparate at first glance, but as we delve deeper into the complexities of their interplay, we often unearth surprising connections that leave us scratching our heads in bemusement. One such unlikely relationship that piqued our curiosity is the correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. While this duo may not be the first to spring to mind when thinking about interconnected phenomena, the data we have collected has indeed unveiled a compelling linkage that demands further investigation.
The use of GMOs in cotton cultivation has seen widespread adoption in Texas, with advancements in genetic engineering ushering in a new era of pest resistance, improved yield, and even fiber quality. Meanwhile, on the energy front, hydropower has long been harnessed as a renewable source of electricity, with its reliance on the natural flow of water making it a stalwart in the realm of sustainable energy. But could there be an undercurrent, so to speak, that links these two seemingly disparate elements? Our research aims to peel back the layers of this enigmatic connection and shed light on the potential implications it holds for both agriculture and energy production on a global scale.
As we take this journey into the labyrinth of agricultural and energy data, we invite the reader to join us in unraveling the tantalizing correlation that we have uncovered. We will navigate through statistical analyses, ponder the ramifications of this unusual link, and perhaps even unravel the thread that connects cotton's genetic makeup to the churning force of water's energy. So buckle up and prepare to explore the unexpected ties that lurk beneath the surface of these multifaceted domains – after all, it's not every day we get to pair cotton and hydropower in the same sentence, let alone in a research paper.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The exploration of the interconnectedness between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and global hydropower energy has prompted a thorough investigation of existing literature on agriculture, genetics, energy generation, and seemingly unrelated associations. The authors find that Smith et al. (2015) have conducted a comprehensive study on the impact of GMO cotton on pest resistance and crop yield in the southern United States. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) have investigated the adoption of GMOs in cotton and their influence on fiber quality and textile production.

Moving beyond these empirical studies, the authors also draw upon works such as "The Cotton Kingdom" by Frederick Law Olmsted, which provides a historical account of cotton cultivation in the antebellum South, shedding light on the societal and economic dynamics at play. Furthermore, "The Power of Water" by William E. Marks presents a detailed analysis of hydropower's role in energy production, offering insights into the global landscape of renewable energy sources.

In a departure from strictly non-fiction sources, the authors also consider fictional works that, though not explicitly related to cotton or hydropower, offer allegorical parallels or imaginative perspectives. Examples include "The Cotton Queen" by Pamela Morsi, a novel set in the world of cotton mills in post-Civil War America, and "The Water Knife" by Paolo Bacigalupi, a dystopian tale of water scarcity and power struggles in the American Southwest.

In the pursuit of a comprehensive review, the authors leave no stone unturned, extending their inquiry to unique sources such as grocery store receipts, coffee shop napkins, and even the occasional fortune cookie message. While the latter may not yield direct scholarly insights, they nonetheless contribute to the authors' efforts in capturing the full spectrum of perspectives on this unusual and thought-provoking correlation.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 2000 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]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The world of agriculture and energy generation may seem disparate at first glance, but as we delve deeper into the complexities of their interplay, we often unearth surprising connections that leave us scratching our heads in bemusement. One such unlikely relationship that piqued our curiosity is the correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. While this duo may not be the first to spring to mind when thinking about interconnected phenomena, the data we have collected has indeed unveiled a compelling linkage that demands further investigation.
The use of GMOs in cotton cultivation has seen widespread adoption in Texas, with advancements in genetic engineering ushering in a new era of pest resistance, improved yield, and even fiber quality. Meanwhile, on the energy front, hydropower has long been harnessed as a renewable source of electricity, with its reliance on the natural flow of water making it a stalwart in the realm of sustainable energy. But could there be an undercurrent, so to speak, that links these two seemingly disparate elements? Our research aims to peel back the layers of this enigmatic connection and shed light on the potential implications it holds for both agriculture and energy production on a global scale.
As we take this journey into the labyrinth of agricultural and energy data, we invite the reader to join us in unraveling the tantalizing correlation that we have uncovered. We will navigate through statistical analyses, ponder the ramifications of this unusual link, and perhaps even unravel the thread that connects cotton's genetic makeup to the churning force of water's energy. So buckle up and prepare to explore the unexpected ties that lurk beneath the surface of these multifaceted domains – after all, it's not every day we get to pair cotton and hydropower in the same sentence, let alone in a research paper.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To undertake this investigation into the curious correlation between GMO adoption in Texas cotton farming and global hydropower energy generation, a rigorous and multi-faceted approach was employed. The primary data sources for this study were the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA), providing a wealth of information spanning the years 2000 to 2021. Our team scoured these databases with the diligence of treasure hunters, sifting through an abundance of agricultural and energy-related statistics to extract the gems of insight that lay hidden within.

The initial step in our convoluted journey involved isolating pertinent data on GMO cotton adoption across different regions of Texas. This endeavor led us into the intricate web of USDA's agricultural databases, where we painstakingly navigated through acres of information to discern the patterns and trends in the adoption of genetically modified cotton seeds. Once we had firmly planted our feet in the fertile ground of agricultural data, our gaze then shifted to the realm of global hydropower energy generation. Here, the EIA's vast reservoirs of energy statistics became our virtual playground, as we delved into the depths of hydropower generation figures, keen on uncovering any underlying connections with our cotton-based quarry.

Having amassed this treasure trove of data from USDA and EIA, our next task involved employing statistical methods that would allow us to untangle the complexities and discern whether there existed a meaningful relationship between the adoption of GMOs in Texas cotton farming and the global generation of hydropower. The statistical analysis began with the calculation of correlation coefficients, where our trusty software diligently churned through the numbers to reveal the strength and direction of the relationship at hand. We were elated to uncover a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.9878537, prompting cheers from our team and a fleeting moment of gratitude for the beauty of statistical analyses.

Further, we subjected our data to the rigors of hypothesis testing, scrutinizing the significance of the observed correlation. The p-value that emerged from our analysis stood proudly below the hallowed threshold of 0.01, signalling that the association we had uncovered was not a mere statistical fluke, but a bona fide relationship worthy of attention. This statistical revelry was complemented by expert insights and discussions, where our team engaged in spirited debates over the potential implications of this baffling connection, occasionally invoking references to cotton-picking coincidences to lighten the mood.

In a bid to ensure the robustness of our findings, we also conducted sensitivity analyses and explored alternative methods of data interpretation, all while maintaining a keen eye for potential confounding variables and spurious correlations. Our interpretation of the findings, interspersed with the occasional cotton-related pun or hydro-infused one-liner, was grounded in the wealth of empirical evidence we had unearthed, providing a layer of depth and humor within our academic discourse.

With our statistical sails billowing in the winds of sound methodologies and our insights peppered with scholarly wit, we present the fruits of our labor in unraveling the enigmatic connection between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower energy.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9878537, r-squared of 0.9758549, 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]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The world of agriculture and energy generation may seem disparate at first glance, but as we delve deeper into the complexities of their interplay, we often unearth surprising connections that leave us scratching our heads in bemusement. One such unlikely relationship that piqued our curiosity is the correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. While this duo may not be the first to spring to mind when thinking about interconnected phenomena, the data we have collected has indeed unveiled a compelling linkage that demands further investigation.
The use of GMOs in cotton cultivation has seen widespread adoption in Texas, with advancements in genetic engineering ushering in a new era of pest resistance, improved yield, and even fiber quality. Meanwhile, on the energy front, hydropower has long been harnessed as a renewable source of electricity, with its reliance on the natural flow of water making it a stalwart in the realm of sustainable energy. But could there be an undercurrent, so to speak, that links these two seemingly disparate elements? Our research aims to peel back the layers of this enigmatic connection and shed light on the potential implications it holds for both agriculture and energy production on a global scale.
As we take this journey into the labyrinth of agricultural and energy data, we invite the reader to join us in unraveling the tantalizing correlation that we have uncovered. We will navigate through statistical analyses, ponder the ramifications of this unusual link, and perhaps even unravel the thread that connects cotton's genetic makeup to the churning force of water's energy. So buckle up and prepare to explore the unexpected ties that lurk beneath the surface of these multifaceted domains – after all, it's not every day we get to pair cotton and hydropower in the same sentence, let alone in a research paper.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally for the time period of 2000 to 2021. The resulting r-squared value of 0.9758549 indicates that approximately 97.6% of the variability in global hydropower energy generation can be explained by the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Texas.

The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the strength of the correlation, providing compelling evidence that the relationship is not merely a consequence of random chance or statistical noise. This robust statistical support underscores the unlikely yet compelling interplay between these two seemingly distinct domains of agriculture and energy production.

Figure 1 presents a visual representation of the observed correlation, showcasing a pronounced clustering of data points that align with the established trends. It is quite the spectacle, one that could even rival the captivating patterns of a cotton field or the mesmerizing flow of a powerful river, don't you think?

These findings prompt contemplation of the broader implications that this correlation may hold. Could it be that the genetic makeup of cotton, influenced by the introduction of GMOs, has some hitherto unexplored impact on the global utilization of hydropower energy? Certainly, this unexpected relationship leaves us grappling with more questions than answers, and perhaps the interconnection between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower is not as straightforward as it appears.

The uncovering of this correlation opens the floodgates, so to speak, for further inquiry into the intricate connections that underpin the agricultural and energy sectors. It beckons researchers to dive deeper into the complexities that intertwine seemingly disparate elements, and to uncover the untold stories that may unfold when we examine data with a keen eye and an open mind.

While this discovery may leave some scratching their heads in bewilderment, it serves as a reminder that the natural world is full of surprises, and the interplay between different facets of our environment may hold unforeseen secrets that are just waiting to be unearthed. So, as we wrap up this section, let's not be too quick to dismiss the peculiar connections we stumble upon in our pursuit of knowledge – after all, they may just hold the key to a world of revelations.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The exploration of the interconnectedness between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and global hydropower energy has prompted a thorough investigation of existing literature on agriculture, genetics, energy generation, and seemingly unrelated associations. The authors find that Smith et al. (2015) have conducted a comprehensive study on the impact of GMO cotton on pest resistance and crop yield in the southern United States. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) have investigated the adoption of GMOs in cotton and their influence on fiber quality and textile production.
Moving beyond these empirical studies, the authors also draw upon works such as "The Cotton Kingdom" by Frederick Law Olmsted, which provides a historical account of cotton cultivation in the antebellum South, shedding light on the societal and economic dynamics at play. Furthermore, "The Power of Water" by William E. Marks presents a detailed analysis of hydropower's role in energy production, offering insights into the global landscape of renewable energy sources.
In a departure from strictly non-fiction sources, the authors also consider fictional works that, though not explicitly related to cotton or hydropower, offer allegorical parallels or imaginative perspectives. Examples include "The Cotton Queen" by Pamela Morsi, a novel set in the world of cotton mills in post-Civil War America, and "The Water Knife" by Paolo Bacigalupi, a dystopian tale of water scarcity and power struggles in the American Southwest.
In the pursuit of a comprehensive review, the authors leave no stone unturned, extending their inquiry to unique sources such as grocery store receipts, coffee shop napkins, and even the occasional fortune cookie message. While the latter may not yield direct scholarly insights, they nonetheless contribute to the authors' efforts in capturing the full spectrum of perspectives on this unusual and thought-provoking correlation.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally for the time period of 2000 to 2021. The resulting r-squared value of 0.9758549 indicates that approximately 97.6% of the variability in global hydropower energy generation can be explained by the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Texas.
The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the strength of the correlation, providing compelling evidence that the relationship is not merely a consequence of random chance or statistical noise. This robust statistical support underscores the unlikely yet compelling interplay between these two seemingly distinct domains of agriculture and energy production.
Figure 1 presents a visual representation of the observed correlation, showcasing a pronounced clustering of data points that align with the established trends. It is quite the spectacle, one that could even rival the captivating patterns of a cotton field or the mesmerizing flow of a powerful river, don't you think?
These findings prompt contemplation of the broader implications that this correlation may hold. Could it be that the genetic makeup of cotton, influenced by the introduction of GMOs, has some hitherto unexplored impact on the global utilization of hydropower energy? Certainly, this unexpected relationship leaves us grappling with more questions than answers, and perhaps the interconnection between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower is not as straightforward as it appears.
The uncovering of this correlation opens the floodgates, so to speak, for further inquiry into the intricate connections that underpin the agricultural and energy sectors. It beckons researchers to dive deeper into the complexities that intertwine seemingly disparate elements, and to uncover the untold stories that may unfold when we examine data with a keen eye and an open mind.
While this discovery may leave some scratching their heads in bewilderment, it serves as a reminder that the natural world is full of surprises, and the interplay between different facets of our environment may hold unforeseen secrets that are just waiting to be unearthed. So, as we wrap up this section, let's not be too quick to dismiss the peculiar connections we stumble upon in our pursuit of knowledge – after all, they may just hold the key to a world of revelations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of this study not only affirm the convergence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the global hydropower energy, but they also beckon us to reexamine the interconnectedness of disparate elements in the natural world. While our findings might raise a few eyebrows, one cannot deny the compelling statistical evidence that underpins this unexpected relationship.

Harkening back to the literature review, the whimsical inclusion of unique sources such as grocery store receipts and coffee shop napkins may have elicited chuckles from some, but we cannot discount the potential for unexpected insights to emerge from unconventional avenues. After all, as the saying goes, sometimes the best ideas come to us when we least expect them. In a similar vein, the correlation unveiled in this study is a reminder that the most unlikely pairings can yield enlightening discoveries.

Examining this correlation through a serious lens, the strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 aligns with previous studies that have explored the impact of GMO cotton on pest resistance, crop yield, and fiber quality. Our results lend empirical support to the notion that the genetic modifications in cotton may have far-reaching implications, extending beyond the realms of agriculture and textile production to intersect with the global energy landscape.

The statistical robustness of our findings underscores the need to dig deeper into the underlying mechanisms that fuel this correlation. While the connection between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower energy may seem as incongruous as a farmer's denims at a black-tie affair, it serves as a testament to the unexpected relationships that lie dormant within data waiting to be unveiled.

As we dwell on the implications of this correlation, we are reminded that the world is indeed a tapestry of interconnected threads, and sometimes, what may appear as the odd stitch turns out to be integral to the beauty of the whole. So, let us embrace the quirky and enigmatic ties that bind different facets of our environment – for in their unraveling, we might just unravel a world of new possibilities.

In the pursuit of knowledge, it's crucial to maintain an open mind and a keen eye, for the unexpected can often hold the most astonishing revelations. And let's not forget to appreciate the beauty and humor in finding connections where we least expect them – after all, scientific inquiry doesn't have to be all starch and no softener!

And with that, we leave you pondering the enigmatic dance between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower energy, perhaps with a newfound appreciation for the whimsical wonders that the world of research can unveil.


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 GMO use in cotton in Texas and Total hydopower energy generated globally. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The world of agriculture and energy generation may seem disparate at first glance, but as we delve deeper into the complexities of their interplay, we often unearth surprising connections that leave us scratching our heads in bemusement. One such unlikely relationship that piqued our curiosity is the correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. While this duo may not be the first to spring to mind when thinking about interconnected phenomena, the data we have collected has indeed unveiled a compelling linkage that demands further investigation.
The use of GMOs in cotton cultivation has seen widespread adoption in Texas, with advancements in genetic engineering ushering in a new era of pest resistance, improved yield, and even fiber quality. Meanwhile, on the energy front, hydropower has long been harnessed as a renewable source of electricity, with its reliance on the natural flow of water making it a stalwart in the realm of sustainable energy. But could there be an undercurrent, so to speak, that links these two seemingly disparate elements? Our research aims to peel back the layers of this enigmatic connection and shed light on the potential implications it holds for both agriculture and energy production on a global scale.
As we take this journey into the labyrinth of agricultural and energy data, we invite the reader to join us in unraveling the tantalizing correlation that we have uncovered. We will navigate through statistical analyses, ponder the ramifications of this unusual link, and perhaps even unravel the thread that connects cotton's genetic makeup to the churning force of water's energy. So buckle up and prepare to explore the unexpected ties that lurk beneath the surface of these multifaceted domains – after all, it's not every day we get to pair cotton and hydropower in the same sentence, let alone in a research paper.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 between the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally for the time period of 2000 to 2021. The resulting r-squared value of 0.9758549 indicates that approximately 97.6% of the variability in global hydropower energy generation can be explained by the adoption of GMOs in cotton farming in Texas.
The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the strength of the correlation, providing compelling evidence that the relationship is not merely a consequence of random chance or statistical noise. This robust statistical support underscores the unlikely yet compelling interplay between these two seemingly distinct domains of agriculture and energy production.
Figure 1 presents a visual representation of the observed correlation, showcasing a pronounced clustering of data points that align with the established trends. It is quite the spectacle, one that could even rival the captivating patterns of a cotton field or the mesmerizing flow of a powerful river, don't you think?
These findings prompt contemplation of the broader implications that this correlation may hold. Could it be that the genetic makeup of cotton, influenced by the introduction of GMOs, has some hitherto unexplored impact on the global utilization of hydropower energy? Certainly, this unexpected relationship leaves us grappling with more questions than answers, and perhaps the interconnection between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower is not as straightforward as it appears.
The uncovering of this correlation opens the floodgates, so to speak, for further inquiry into the intricate connections that underpin the agricultural and energy sectors. It beckons researchers to dive deeper into the complexities that intertwine seemingly disparate elements, and to uncover the untold stories that may unfold when we examine data with a keen eye and an open mind.
While this discovery may leave some scratching their heads in bewilderment, it serves as a reminder that the natural world is full of surprises, and the interplay between different facets of our environment may hold unforeseen secrets that are just waiting to be unearthed. So, as we wrap up this section, let's not be too quick to dismiss the peculiar connections we stumble upon in our pursuit of knowledge – after all, they may just hold the key to a world of revelations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has illuminated a remarkable correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. The overwhelmingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and the statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 have left us marveling at the unexpected tie between these two seemingly unrelated domains.

While the findings have undoubtedly sparked intrigue and raised eyebrows, it is important to interpret them with cautious curiosity. The relationship between cotton's genetic makeup and the utilization of hydropower energy may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but it invites us to ponder the mysteries that lie beneath the surface of conventional wisdom.

As we consider the implications of this correlation, we may find ourselves treading in uncharted waters, pondering the ripples of impact that extend far beyond the fields of Texas cotton. Could this enigmatic link hold the key to unlocking new avenues for sustainable energy production, or is it simply a quirk of nature that dances to its own beat?

While the sheer strength of the correlation demands attention, we must approach it with a healthy dose of skepticism and a willingness to explore the uncharted territories of scientific inquiry. We may not have all the answers at present, but the journey of discovery is often laced with unexpected twists and turns, much like a meandering river finding its course.

In the grand tapestry of scientific exploration, the improbable connections that we uncover serve as bright threads that add color to our understanding of the world. This correlation between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower energy is no exception, offering a playful reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can reveal captivating insights that defy our preconceptions.

As we draw the curtains on this study, let's not forget to appreciate the whimsical nature of scientific discovery. The world is indeed full of surprises, and this correlation reminds us not to overlook the peculiar and unexpected relationships that may just hold the key to unlocking new vistas of knowledge. In light of these findings, we assert that no further research in this specific area is needed, as we've surely cottoned on to something big here!




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 Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agronomic Anomalies


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 Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Research (ISAER)


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 Cotton's GMOs and Global Hydro: A Correlation That'll Make You Go Batty with an abstract of In this research, we delve into the intriguing relationship between the adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in Texas and the total hydropower energy generated globally. Using data from the USDA and the Energy Information Administration, we aimed to shed light on this unconventional pairing. Our findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9878537 and statistically significant p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2000 to 2021. The implications of this link between cotton's GMOs and global hydropower indeed warrants attention, as it seems to suggest that the energy generated from water's flow is somehow influenced by the genetic modifications in everyone's favorite fiber. And as we unravel this relationship, we are left pondering whether this holds the key to solving the world's energy crisis or if it's just another cotton-picking coincidence.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, hydropower energy, correlation, USDA data, Energy Information Administration, genetically modified organisms, cotton farming, Texas, global hydropower, correlation coefficient, p-value, energy generation, water flow, fiber genetics, energy crisis

*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

GMO use in cotton in Texas
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in Texas genetically modified with both Bt and HT
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton in Texas

Total hydopower energy generated globally
Detailed data title: Total hydopower energy generated globally in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Total hydopower energy generated globally

Correlation r = 0.9878537 (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 = 0.9758549 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 97.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Total hydopower energy generated globally) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Texas) over the 22 years from 2000 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.2E-17. 0.0000000000000000119977750979
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 0.99 in 1.2E-15% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 83,348,786,907,585,264 random variables You don't actually need 83 quadrillion 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 21 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 21 because we have two variables measured over a period of 22 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.

[ 0.97, 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.
2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
GMO use in cotton in Texas (GMO cotton %)664681418283135514958607475757677888086
Total hydopower energy generated globally (Billion kWh)2622.12567.312611.042616.192787.252906.553007.533036.473172.883229.893408.543470.953630.083760.823831.173845.433983.154028.094160.594184.034322.714224.73




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([6,6,4,6,8,14,18,28,31,35,51,49,58,60,74,75,75,76,77,88,80,86,])
array_2 = np.array([2622.1,2567.31,2611.04,2616.19,2787.25,2906.55,3007.53,3036.47,3172.88,3229.89,3408.54,3470.95,3630.08,3760.82,3831.17,3845.43,3983.15,4028.09,4160.59,4184.03,4322.71,4224.73,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in Texas"
array_2_name = "Total hydopower energy generated globally"

# 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?

Hats off to you for rating!


Correlation ID: 1745 · Black Variable ID: 799 · Red Variable ID: 23440
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0