about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,900 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Fossil fuel use in Sweden and the second variable is US birth rates of triplets or more.  The chart goes from 2002 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Sweden reduced its reliance on fossil fuels, the air quality improved, leading to a decrease in the occurrence of spontaneous fertility dance parties in the US.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image resembling a lively and heartwarming magazine cover that features two contrasting scenes: A peaceful Swedish home with a family gathered around a crackling fireplace, and an American hospital filled with joy as a couple cradles their newborn triplets, surrounded by beaming family and friends. The Swedish scene should portray a cozy interior, showcasing a family comfortably sitting together around the fireplace. The American hospital scene should capture the joy and excitement of the new parents and their triplets, with family and friends gathered around in a bright, bustling setting. Both scenes should exude warmth and happiness. 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: Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. 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 Discovery magazine cover image Low poly Cutsy graphics Celtic art Realistic
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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cozy Swedish home, a family is sitting around a crackling fireplace fuelled by clean, renewable wood. Meanwhile, in a bustling American hospital, a joyful couple is cradling their newborn triplets, surrounded by beaming family and friends.

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: In a cozy Swedish home, a family is sitting around a crackling fireplace fuelled by clean, renewable wood. Meanwhile, in a bustling American hospital, a joyful couple is cradling their newborn triplets, surrounded by beaming family and friends. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image resembling a lively and heartwarming magazine cover that features two contrasting scenes: A peaceful Swedish home with a family gathered around a crackling fireplace, and an American hospital filled with joy as a couple cradles their newborn triplets, surrounded by beaming family and friends. The Swedish scene should portray a cozy interior, showcasing a family comfortably sitting together around the fireplace. The American hospital scene should capture the joy and excitement of the new parents and their triplets, with family and friends gathered around in a bright, bustling setting. Both scenes should exude warmth and happiness.

*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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden caused US birth rates of triplets or more to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

Journal of Ecological Euphemisms

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 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from Energy Information Administration and CDC to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and p < 0.01 for 2002 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]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In the ever-evolving landscape of environmental and reproductive studies, the potential connections between fossil fuel use and birth rates of multiple offspring have often been overlooked. As the world grapples with the consequences of fuel consumption, it is imperative to investigate how this seemingly mundane aspect of modern life may be leaving an unexpected footprint on fertility outcomes. It's as if the answer has been hiding in plain sight this whole time – a crude twist of fate, if you will!

Anecdotal evidence has long hinted at the curious correlation between fuel consumption and fertility, with some even speculating that high octane fuels could be the key to producing octuplets! But in the realm of academic inquiry, joking aside, it is essential to objectively scrutinize the data and determine whether there is indeed a significant relationship between fossil fuel use and the likelihood of multiple births.

As we navigate through the mazes of statistical analyses and trend examinations, it becomes increasingly apparent that the association between these seemingly disparate domains is more than mere happenstance. It's almost as if the ancient fossilized remains in the ground have a mystical connection to the creation of multiple tiny humans – talk about bones of contention!

While the scientific community may initially scoff at the suggestion of a link between something as staid as fossil fuel use and the delightful chaos of raising triplets or more, our research endeavors to shed light on this unexplored territory. Perhaps it's time we start thinking of fuel not only as an energy source, but also as a potential catalyst for an explosive increase in diaper demand. After all, there's no denying that when it comes to fossil fuel use, the stakes are high – and potentially higher when it comes to the number of little rascals joining the party!

As we embark on this unconventional journey, one cannot help but marvel at the intricate web of interconnected factors shaping our world. It's almost as if the Earth itself is nurturing a mischievous sense of humor, teasing us with unexpected correlations and surprising twists. With each revelation, we are reminded that the tapestry of life is woven with threads of unpredictability – a reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can unveil truths more colorful than a box of crayons.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of environmental and reproductive studies, the potential connections between fossil fuel use and birth rates of multiple offspring have often been overlooked. As the world grapples with the consequences of fuel consumption, it is imperative to investigate how this seemingly mundane aspect of modern life may be leaving an unexpected footprint on fertility outcomes. It's as if the answer has been hiding in plain sight this whole time – a crude twist of fate, if you will!
Anecdotal evidence has long hinted at the curious correlation between fuel consumption and fertility, with some even speculating that high octane fuels could be the key to producing octuplets! But in the realm of academic inquiry, joking aside, it is essential to objectively scrutinize the data and determine whether there is indeed a significant relationship between fossil fuel use and the likelihood of multiple births.
As we navigate through the mazes of statistical analyses and trend examinations, it becomes increasingly apparent that the association between these seemingly disparate domains is more than mere happenstance. It's almost as if the ancient fossilized remains in the ground have a mystical connection to the creation of multiple tiny humans – talk about bones of contention!
While the scientific community may initially scoff at the suggestion of a link between something as staid as fossil fuel use and the delightful chaos of raising triplets or more, our research endeavors to shed light on this unexplored territory. Perhaps it's time we start thinking of fuel not only as an energy source, but also as a potential catalyst for an explosive increase in diaper demand. After all, there's no denying that when it comes to fossil fuel use, the stakes are high – and potentially higher when it comes to the number of little rascals joining the party!
As we embark on this unconventional journey, one cannot help but marvel at the intricate web of interconnected factors shaping our world. It's almost as if the Earth itself is nurturing a mischievous sense of humor, teasing us with unexpected correlations and surprising twists. With each revelation, we are reminded that the tapestry of life is woven with threads of unpredictability – a reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can unveil truths more colorful than a box of crayons.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

As we dive into the literature exploring the profound, yet inexplicably comical, connection between fossil fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more, we encounter a plethora of studies that have contributed to our understanding of this quirky association.

Smith et al. (2015) laid a foundational basis for our exploration, uncovering a surprising correlation between gasoline usage and the incidence of multiple births in urban areas. Their meticulous analysis not only highlighted the statistical significance of this relationship but also sparked puns that would make even the most stoic researcher crack a smile. It seems that when it comes to fuel and fertility, the more, the "merrier!"

Doe and Jones (2018) further delved into the nuanced interplay between diesel emissions and the likelihood of conceiving triplets, introducing a dialectic that fuel consumption might just be the "ignition" for a triple blessing. Their findings ignited discussions within the academic community, igniting a spark of curiosity that burned brighter than even the most efficient combustion engines.

Moving away from academic articles, the works of environmental economists have also shed light on this peculiar relationship. In "The Economics of Energy and the Miracle of Life," the authors propose that the term "fossil" fuel might not solely refer to its origins but also its potential to fuel the birth of multiple offspring. Truly, the language of academia is illuminated with the light-hearted glow of unexpected connections!

As we transition from serious academic pursuits to the boundless realm of non-fiction and fiction literature, we are met with titles that seemingly embrace the whimsy of our research topic. "Crude Chronicles: The Unlikely Saga of Fossil Fuel Fertility" offers a light-hearted take on our investigation, weaving a tale of unexpected connections that would enthrall even the most astute reader.

On the other end of the spectrum, in a twist that seemingly defies the laws of scholarly exploration, we cannot overlook the fictitious works that, despite their lack of empirical rigor, provide a unique perspective on the subject matter. "The Combustion Conundrum: A Tale of Triplets and Turmoil" delves into a fictional world where the rising fumes of fossil fuels seem to intertwine with a surge in triplet births, captivating audiences with its fantastical yet oddly thought-provoking narrative.

And now, in a departure from conventional academic practice, we dare to traverse uncharted territory. In the pursuit of research, one must not overlook the unconventional sources of wisdom. It is with great pride that we present the groundbreaking insights gleaned from the backs of shampoo bottles – an unorthodox, yet surprisingly informative, repository of knowledge. As we lather, rinse, and repeat our investigations, we are met with cryptic musings that suggest a sudsy link between fossil fuels and the potential for multiple bundles of joy. Indeed, the pursuit of scientific truth knows no bounds!

As we emerge from the depths of literary exploration with ample puns in tow, it becomes clear that the intersection of fossil fuel consumption and fertility holds a charm that extends beyond the realm of traditional academic discourse. With each page turned and each unconventional source considered, it is apparent that our understanding of this peculiar correlation is as multi-faceted as the facets of a well-polished diamond – or, perhaps in this case, as multi-faceted as the reflections on a well-maintained car's glossy exterior.

This literature review not only serves to reinforce the significance of our research but also invites readers to embrace the unexpected, revel in the humor threaded throughout our scholarly pursuits, and, above all, venture forth with open hearts and minds into the tangled, yet delightfully amusing, landscape of fossil fuel and fertility.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Energy Information Administration and CDC . You used data from 2002 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]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of environmental and reproductive studies, the potential connections between fossil fuel use and birth rates of multiple offspring have often been overlooked. As the world grapples with the consequences of fuel consumption, it is imperative to investigate how this seemingly mundane aspect of modern life may be leaving an unexpected footprint on fertility outcomes. It's as if the answer has been hiding in plain sight this whole time – a crude twist of fate, if you will!
Anecdotal evidence has long hinted at the curious correlation between fuel consumption and fertility, with some even speculating that high octane fuels could be the key to producing octuplets! But in the realm of academic inquiry, joking aside, it is essential to objectively scrutinize the data and determine whether there is indeed a significant relationship between fossil fuel use and the likelihood of multiple births.
As we navigate through the mazes of statistical analyses and trend examinations, it becomes increasingly apparent that the association between these seemingly disparate domains is more than mere happenstance. It's almost as if the ancient fossilized remains in the ground have a mystical connection to the creation of multiple tiny humans – talk about bones of contention!
While the scientific community may initially scoff at the suggestion of a link between something as staid as fossil fuel use and the delightful chaos of raising triplets or more, our research endeavors to shed light on this unexplored territory. Perhaps it's time we start thinking of fuel not only as an energy source, but also as a potential catalyst for an explosive increase in diaper demand. After all, there's no denying that when it comes to fossil fuel use, the stakes are high – and potentially higher when it comes to the number of little rascals joining the party!
As we embark on this unconventional journey, one cannot help but marvel at the intricate web of interconnected factors shaping our world. It's almost as if the Earth itself is nurturing a mischievous sense of humor, teasing us with unexpected correlations and surprising twists. With each revelation, we are reminded that the tapestry of life is woven with threads of unpredictability – a reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can unveil truths more colorful than a box of crayons.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic connection between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more, we embarked on a journey that was equal parts scientific rigor and lighthearted curiosity. Our approach was akin to attempting to decode hieroglyphs with a magnifying glass, a touch of humor, and a whole lot of determination.

First, we scoured the vast landscape of data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sifting through virtual mountains of statistical sediment. It was like panning for fertility-related nuggets in a river of fossil fuel consumption data – a true gold rush of information, if you will.

In order to discern any potential patterns or associations, we employed a mishmash of statistical techniques that would make even the most seasoned data analyst furrow their brows in bemusement. From the good old correlation analysis to the more avant-garde regression models, we left no statistical stone unturned. It was almost like watching a comedy act unfold – except this time, the punchlines were p-values, and the plot twisted with each beta coefficient.

Additionally, we took a deep dive into the world of time series analysis, charting the ebbs and flows of fuel consumption alongside the peaks and valleys of triplet birth rates. It was a bit like trying to synchronize a dance routine between two incredibly mismatched partners – one with an insatiable appetite for gasoline and the other with an inexplicable penchant for producing multiple bundles of joy.

The art of data visualization played a pivotal role in our methodology, as we harnessed the power of captivating graphs and charts to illustrate the trends we unearthed. The integration of line plots, bar charts, and scatter diagrams transformed our findings into a visual smorgasbord that would make even the most stoic observer crack a smile. It was as if we were creating a veritable art exhibit – except our canvases were filled with data points rather than acrylic strokes.

To ensure the comprehensiveness of our findings, we conducted subgroup analyses based on geographical regions and time periods, adding layers of complexity to our investigation. It was like indulging in a complex Sudoku puzzle, except instead of numbers, we were arranging and rearranging datasets to uncover new dimensions of the relationship between fossil fuel use and the surprising surge in multiple births.

Subtle nuances in our methodology, such as adjusting for potential confounding variables and employing robust sensitivity analyses, lent an air of precision to our study. It was akin to meticulously crafting an intricate puzzle, where each piece delicately fell into place to reveal the bigger picture – and in our case, the picture seemed to embody a whimsical dance between fuel consumption and fertility outcomes.



Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

For the time period 2002 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.8315259, r-squared of 0.6914353, 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]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of environmental and reproductive studies, the potential connections between fossil fuel use and birth rates of multiple offspring have often been overlooked. As the world grapples with the consequences of fuel consumption, it is imperative to investigate how this seemingly mundane aspect of modern life may be leaving an unexpected footprint on fertility outcomes. It's as if the answer has been hiding in plain sight this whole time – a crude twist of fate, if you will!
Anecdotal evidence has long hinted at the curious correlation between fuel consumption and fertility, with some even speculating that high octane fuels could be the key to producing octuplets! But in the realm of academic inquiry, joking aside, it is essential to objectively scrutinize the data and determine whether there is indeed a significant relationship between fossil fuel use and the likelihood of multiple births.
As we navigate through the mazes of statistical analyses and trend examinations, it becomes increasingly apparent that the association between these seemingly disparate domains is more than mere happenstance. It's almost as if the ancient fossilized remains in the ground have a mystical connection to the creation of multiple tiny humans – talk about bones of contention!
While the scientific community may initially scoff at the suggestion of a link between something as staid as fossil fuel use and the delightful chaos of raising triplets or more, our research endeavors to shed light on this unexplored territory. Perhaps it's time we start thinking of fuel not only as an energy source, but also as a potential catalyst for an explosive increase in diaper demand. After all, there's no denying that when it comes to fossil fuel use, the stakes are high – and potentially higher when it comes to the number of little rascals joining the party!
As we embark on this unconventional journey, one cannot help but marvel at the intricate web of interconnected factors shaping our world. It's almost as if the Earth itself is nurturing a mischievous sense of humor, teasing us with unexpected correlations and surprising twists. With each revelation, we are reminded that the tapestry of life is woven with threads of unpredictability – a reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can unveil truths more colorful than a box of crayons.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation into the relationship between fossil fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States were nothing short of eye-opening. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and an r-squared of 0.6914353, our findings revealed a strong and statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated variables. It’s as if the fuel was sparking a fertility frenzy!

Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of multiple offspring. As we gazed upon this graph, it became apparent that the fuel for thought on this matter was far from fossilized!

Our analysis showed that as fossil fuel consumption increased, so did the likelihood of multiple births. It seems that when it comes to fuel's impact on fertility, we can't help but think that "where there's smoke, there's triplets" - a triple whammy of a discovery, indeed!

The strength of this correlation dares us to delve deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unlikely relationship. With a p-value less than 0.01, our results possess a punch, worthy of a dad joke that would make even the most stoic scholar crack a smile. After all, when it comes to fuel and fertility, it’s clear that there’s more than meets the eye – and perhaps even more little eyes (and diapers) on the horizon!

In conclusion, our study unearthed a connection between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more, prompting us to reevaluate the way we view energy consumption and its unforeseen effects on fertility outcomes. As we close this chapter, it is evident that the bond between fuel and fertility is not just a gas – it’s a phenomenon that is sure to ignite spirited discussions and fuel new avenues of research!

With these findings, we hope to inspire further exploration into the delightful, yet puzzling, intricacies of our world. Perhaps the next time you fill up your tank, you'll find yourself contemplating the potential to fuel not only your car, but also the birth of future multiples. As they say, "May your mileage be high, and your babies be higher!"


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
As we dive into the literature exploring the profound, yet inexplicably comical, connection between fossil fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more, we encounter a plethora of studies that have contributed to our understanding of this quirky association.
Smith et al. (2015) laid a foundational basis for our exploration, uncovering a surprising correlation between gasoline usage and the incidence of multiple births in urban areas. Their meticulous analysis not only highlighted the statistical significance of this relationship but also sparked puns that would make even the most stoic researcher crack a smile. It seems that when it comes to fuel and fertility, the more, the "merrier!"
Doe and Jones (2018) further delved into the nuanced interplay between diesel emissions and the likelihood of conceiving triplets, introducing a dialectic that fuel consumption might just be the "ignition" for a triple blessing. Their findings ignited discussions within the academic community, igniting a spark of curiosity that burned brighter than even the most efficient combustion engines.
Moving away from academic articles, the works of environmental economists have also shed light on this peculiar relationship. In "The Economics of Energy and the Miracle of Life," the authors propose that the term "fossil" fuel might not solely refer to its origins but also its potential to fuel the birth of multiple offspring. Truly, the language of academia is illuminated with the light-hearted glow of unexpected connections!
As we transition from serious academic pursuits to the boundless realm of non-fiction and fiction literature, we are met with titles that seemingly embrace the whimsy of our research topic. "Crude Chronicles: The Unlikely Saga of Fossil Fuel Fertility" offers a light-hearted take on our investigation, weaving a tale of unexpected connections that would enthrall even the most astute reader.
On the other end of the spectrum, in a twist that seemingly defies the laws of scholarly exploration, we cannot overlook the fictitious works that, despite their lack of empirical rigor, provide a unique perspective on the subject matter. "The Combustion Conundrum: A Tale of Triplets and Turmoil" delves into a fictional world where the rising fumes of fossil fuels seem to intertwine with a surge in triplet births, captivating audiences with its fantastical yet oddly thought-provoking narrative.
And now, in a departure from conventional academic practice, we dare to traverse uncharted territory. In the pursuit of research, one must not overlook the unconventional sources of wisdom. It is with great pride that we present the groundbreaking insights gleaned from the backs of shampoo bottles – an unorthodox, yet surprisingly informative, repository of knowledge. As we lather, rinse, and repeat our investigations, we are met with cryptic musings that suggest a sudsy link between fossil fuels and the potential for multiple bundles of joy. Indeed, the pursuit of scientific truth knows no bounds!
As we emerge from the depths of literary exploration with ample puns in tow, it becomes clear that the intersection of fossil fuel consumption and fertility holds a charm that extends beyond the realm of traditional academic discourse. With each page turned and each unconventional source considered, it is apparent that our understanding of this peculiar correlation is as multi-faceted as the facets of a well-polished diamond – or, perhaps in this case, as multi-faceted as the reflections on a well-maintained car's glossy exterior.
This literature review not only serves to reinforce the significance of our research but also invites readers to embrace the unexpected, revel in the humor threaded throughout our scholarly pursuits, and, above all, venture forth with open hearts and minds into the tangled, yet delightfully amusing, landscape of fossil fuel and fertility.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the relationship between fossil fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States were nothing short of eye-opening. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and an r-squared of 0.6914353, our findings revealed a strong and statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated variables. It’s as if the fuel was sparking a fertility frenzy!
Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of multiple offspring. As we gazed upon this graph, it became apparent that the fuel for thought on this matter was far from fossilized!
Our analysis showed that as fossil fuel consumption increased, so did the likelihood of multiple births. It seems that when it comes to fuel's impact on fertility, we can't help but think that "where there's smoke, there's triplets" - a triple whammy of a discovery, indeed!
The strength of this correlation dares us to delve deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unlikely relationship. With a p-value less than 0.01, our results possess a punch, worthy of a dad joke that would make even the most stoic scholar crack a smile. After all, when it comes to fuel and fertility, it’s clear that there’s more than meets the eye – and perhaps even more little eyes (and diapers) on the horizon!
In conclusion, our study unearthed a connection between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more, prompting us to reevaluate the way we view energy consumption and its unforeseen effects on fertility outcomes. As we close this chapter, it is evident that the bond between fuel and fertility is not just a gas – it’s a phenomenon that is sure to ignite spirited discussions and fuel new avenues of research!
With these findings, we hope to inspire further exploration into the delightful, yet puzzling, intricacies of our world. Perhaps the next time you fill up your tank, you'll find yourself contemplating the potential to fuel not only your car, but also the birth of future multiples. As they say, "May your mileage be high, and your babies be higher!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study delved into a seemingly whimsical association between fossil fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more, and the results, believe it or not, provided compelling evidence of a robust relationship. The correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and an r-squared of 0.6914353 point to a significant and unexpected connection between the two variables. It's as if the fuel was revving up the reproductive engines!

Our findings are in line with prior research by Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2018), whose work on the correlation between fuel usage and multiple births in urban areas suggested a similar connection. It's clear that when it comes to fuel and fertility, there's a "twin"ergy at play, and our study further reinforces the notion that this relationship is not just a matter of coincidence.

The strength of our correlation dares us to delve deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unlikely relationship, and we believe our study has ignited a spark of curiosity that will fuel future research in this area. It seems that when it comes to fuel and fertility, the connections are more than just "fuel-ish" fantasies!

Our results also resonate with the captivating narrative presented in "The Combustion Conundrum: A Tale of Triplets and Turmoil," as our findings seem to mirror the fictional world where rising fumes of fossil fuels intertwine with a surge in triplet births. It's as if reality is imitating fiction, or perhaps, fiction is imitating a truly unexpected reality!

As we close this segment of our research, it's evident that our findings have introduced a whole new dimension to the discourse on fossil fuel consumption and its potential unforeseen effects on fertility outcomes. It's not just a gas – it's a phenomenon that is sure to ignite spirited discussions, with our findings fueling new avenues of research!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Fossil fuel use in Sweden and US birth rates of triplets or more. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!

Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!

Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!

We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of environmental and reproductive studies, the potential connections between fossil fuel use and birth rates of multiple offspring have often been overlooked. As the world grapples with the consequences of fuel consumption, it is imperative to investigate how this seemingly mundane aspect of modern life may be leaving an unexpected footprint on fertility outcomes. It's as if the answer has been hiding in plain sight this whole time – a crude twist of fate, if you will!
Anecdotal evidence has long hinted at the curious correlation between fuel consumption and fertility, with some even speculating that high octane fuels could be the key to producing octuplets! But in the realm of academic inquiry, joking aside, it is essential to objectively scrutinize the data and determine whether there is indeed a significant relationship between fossil fuel use and the likelihood of multiple births.
As we navigate through the mazes of statistical analyses and trend examinations, it becomes increasingly apparent that the association between these seemingly disparate domains is more than mere happenstance. It's almost as if the ancient fossilized remains in the ground have a mystical connection to the creation of multiple tiny humans – talk about bones of contention!
While the scientific community may initially scoff at the suggestion of a link between something as staid as fossil fuel use and the delightful chaos of raising triplets or more, our research endeavors to shed light on this unexplored territory. Perhaps it's time we start thinking of fuel not only as an energy source, but also as a potential catalyst for an explosive increase in diaper demand. After all, there's no denying that when it comes to fossil fuel use, the stakes are high – and potentially higher when it comes to the number of little rascals joining the party!
As we embark on this unconventional journey, one cannot help but marvel at the intricate web of interconnected factors shaping our world. It's almost as if the Earth itself is nurturing a mischievous sense of humor, teasing us with unexpected correlations and surprising twists. With each revelation, we are reminded that the tapestry of life is woven with threads of unpredictability – a reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can unveil truths more colorful than a box of crayons.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the relationship between fossil fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States were nothing short of eye-opening. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and an r-squared of 0.6914353, our findings revealed a strong and statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated variables. It’s as if the fuel was sparking a fertility frenzy!
Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of multiple offspring. As we gazed upon this graph, it became apparent that the fuel for thought on this matter was far from fossilized!
Our analysis showed that as fossil fuel consumption increased, so did the likelihood of multiple births. It seems that when it comes to fuel's impact on fertility, we can't help but think that "where there's smoke, there's triplets" - a triple whammy of a discovery, indeed!
The strength of this correlation dares us to delve deeper into the mechanisms underlying this unlikely relationship. With a p-value less than 0.01, our results possess a punch, worthy of a dad joke that would make even the most stoic scholar crack a smile. After all, when it comes to fuel and fertility, it’s clear that there’s more than meets the eye – and perhaps even more little eyes (and diapers) on the horizon!
In conclusion, our study unearthed a connection between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more, prompting us to reevaluate the way we view energy consumption and its unforeseen effects on fertility outcomes. As we close this chapter, it is evident that the bond between fuel and fertility is not just a gas – it’s a phenomenon that is sure to ignite spirited discussions and fuel new avenues of research!
With these findings, we hope to inspire further exploration into the delightful, yet puzzling, intricacies of our world. Perhaps the next time you fill up your tank, you'll find yourself contemplating the potential to fuel not only your car, but also the birth of future multiples. As they say, "May your mileage be high, and your babies be higher!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has illuminated a surprising connection between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. The robust correlation and statistically significant association uncovered in our investigation suggest that the impact of fuel on fertility may be more than just a pipe dream – it's a reality poised for further exploration! It's like the Earth decided to play the ultimate game of "fuels and ladders," elevating our understanding of these seemingly incongruent elements to new heights.

As we tie a bow on this quirky quest, it is clear that the relationship between fuel consumption and fertility outcomes is no laughing matter – well, except for when we throw in a clever dad joke! After all, it's not every day that academic studies fuel both intellectual curiosity and a strong desire for puns.

With our findings in hand, it is safe to say that this avenue of research has been exhaustively (pun intended) explored. Further investigation into the connection between fuel consumption and the birth rates of triplets or more may just end up running on fumes – there's no need to reinvent the wheel, or in this case, the fuel tank! It's time to put the brakes on this particular inquiry and let it rest in the annals of academic novelty. After all, we wouldn't want to overfuel the flames of curiosity, or worse, spark a frenzy of even more plentiful puns!


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 Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Ecological Euphemisms


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 Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Sustainable Energy and Reproductive Health


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 Fossil Fools: The Crude Connection Between Fuel Consumption and Fertility with an abstract of In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of fossil fuel use and its peculiar relationship with birth rates of triplets or more in Sweden and the United States. We dug deep, and not just into the earth’s sediment layers, to examine the potential impact of fuel consumption on the proliferation of multiple offspring. Our findings revealed an unexpected correlation that may just leave you seeing triple!
Poring over data from the Energy Information Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years 2002 to 2021, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8315259 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant association between fossil fuel use and the birth rates of triplets or more. This relationship is sure to fuel new discussions and spark an energy of curiosity!
Our results suggest that as fossil fuel consumption increases, so does the likelihood of multiple births. As the old saying goes, "The more the fuel, the more the trouble!" It seems that when it comes to fuel consumption and fertility, the stakes are high – or should we say, higher multiples are at stake!
We hope that our research will ignite further exploration into the unforeseen intersections between energy consumption and the miracle of life. Let’s continue to unearth these fascinating connections and cultivate a greater understanding of the world around us – one pun at a time!

ChatGPT:

fossil fuel consumption, fertility rates, multiple births, energy consumption, correlation coefficient, p-value, fuel consumption and birth rates, fossil fuel use and fertility, Energy Information Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Sweden, United States, 2002-2021, statistical association, energy consumption and reproduction

*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

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

US birth rates of triplets or more
Source: CDC
See what else correlates with US birth rates of triplets or more

Correlation r = 0.8315259 (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 = 0.6914353 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 69.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., US birth rates of triplets or more) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Fossil fuel use in Sweden) over the 20 years from 2002 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.5E-6. 0.0000055369195700207950000000
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 0.83 in 0.00055% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 180,606 random variables You don't actually need 180 thousand 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 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 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.

[ 0.62, 0.93 ] 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.
20022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Fossil fuel use in Sweden (Billion kWh)6.74928.372584.900223.65663.987483.389643.488343.645326.985564.244062.843952.655071.747631.869991.999651.727372.014541.625020.7047321.53404
US birth rates of triplets or more (Birth rate per 100,000)183186180170156151148152138137124.4119.5113.5103.6101.4101.69387.779.680




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([6.7492,8.37258,4.90022,3.6566,3.98748,3.38964,3.48834,3.64532,6.98556,4.24406,2.84395,2.65507,1.74763,1.86999,1.99965,1.72737,2.01454,1.62502,0.704732,1.53404,])
array_2 = np.array([183,186,180,170,156,151,148,152,138,137,124.4,119.5,113.5,103.6,101.4,101.6,93,87.7,79.6,80,])
array_1_name = "Fossil fuel use in Sweden"
array_2_name = "US birth rates of triplets or more"

# 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 correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!


Correlation ID: 1900 · Black Variable ID: 24008 · Red Variable ID: 55
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0