about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,722 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Democratic Senators in Texas and the second variable is The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the Democrat votes for Senators in Texas increased, their support for renewable energy initiatives surged. This led to a boom in the alternative energy sector, creating a high demand for wellhead pumpers to operate the newfangled cowboy hat-shaped oil pumps that harness the power of Texas-sized gusts of hot air. It's a true Texan twist on green energy, y'all!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate a comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s depicting a Texas landscape with cowboy hat-shaped oil pumps harnessing the power of Texas-sized gusts of hot air. The pumps should be dotted with a unique, Texan twist on green energy. 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: Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. 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: Hyper-realistic A Discovery magazine cover image Charcoal Glitch art A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s
ChatGPT: A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s

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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas, in the following situation: As the Democrat votes for Senators in Texas increased, their support for renewable energy initiatives surged. This led to a boom in the alternative energy sector, creating a high demand for wellhead pumpers to operate the newfangled cowboy hat-shaped oil pumps that harness the power of Texas-sized gusts of hot air. It's a true Texan twist on green energy, y'all!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Texas, the number of Democrat votes for Senators soared, leading to a wave of support for renewable energy. As a result, the alternative energy sector boomed, with cowboy hat-shaped oil pumps harnessing the power of Texas-sized gusts of hot air, creating a high demand for wellhead pumpers. The landscape was dotted with these unique pumps, representing a true Texan twist on green energy.

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 comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s ] and depicting this scene: In Texas, the number of Democrat votes for Senators soared, leading to a wave of support for renewable energy. As a result, the alternative energy sector boomed, with cowboy hat-shaped oil pumps harnessing the power of Texas-sized gusts of hot air, creating a high demand for wellhead pumpers. The landscape was dotted with these unique pumps, representing a true Texan twist on green energy. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate a comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s depicting a Texas landscape with cowboy hat-shaped oil pumps harnessing the power of Texas-sized gusts of hot air. The pumps should be dotted with a unique, Texan twist on green energy.

*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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas caused The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

The Journal of Political Demographics and Societal Trends

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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for 2003 to 2020.

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]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
"Y'all ready for a wild ride through the heart of Texas politics and petroleum? Don your cowboy hat and saddle up because in this paper, we're delving into the curious correlation between Democrat support for Senators in the Lone Star State and the population of wellhead pumpers.

Now, some might say this connection is as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but hold onto your 10-gallon hats because our research is about to lasso some unexpected insights. We've crunched the numbers, swung around some statistical lassos, and rounded up some rather surprising findings. As we rustle through the data from 2003 to 2020, we've uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and a p-value of less than 0.01.

Critics might say we're just blowing hot air, but we assure you, this ain't no tall tale. Our findings are as real as a Texas-sized steak. We promise to keep the puns flowing faster than a geyser and the correlations tighter than a rodeo cowboy's grip, so buckle up for a rollicking ride through the intersection of politics and petroleum.

So, grab your spurs and get ready to wrangle with the unexpected as we uncover the fascinating connection between Democrat votes and the unseen heroes of Texas' oil fields. It's time to pump up the votes and harness the power of wellhead pumpers in the whirlwind of Texas politics!"


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
"Y'all ready for a wild ride through the heart of Texas politics and petroleum? Don your cowboy hat and saddle up because in this paper, we're delving into the curious correlation between Democrat support for Senators in the Lone Star State and the population of wellhead pumpers.
Now, some might say this connection is as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but hold onto your 10-gallon hats because our research is about to lasso some unexpected insights. We've crunched the numbers, swung around some statistical lassos, and rounded up some rather surprising findings. As we rustle through the data from 2003 to 2020, we've uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and a p-value of less than 0.01.
Critics might say we're just blowing hot air, but we assure you, this ain't no tall tale. Our findings are as real as a Texas-sized steak. We promise to keep the puns flowing faster than a geyser and the correlations tighter than a rodeo cowboy's grip, so buckle up for a rollicking ride through the intersection of politics and petroleum.
So, grab your spurs and get ready to wrangle with the unexpected as we uncover the fascinating connection between Democrat votes and the unseen heroes of Texas' oil fields. It's time to pump up the votes and harness the power of wellhead pumpers in the whirlwind of Texas politics!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In the riveting world of political science, Smith et al. (2015) set out to uncover the factors influencing voter behavior in Texas. Their study, "Voter Affiliation and Political Identity in the Lone Star State," delves deep into the intricacies of partisan support in the region. Making use of advanced statistical models and rigorous survey data, the authors find a myriad of factors, from socioeconomic status to demographic shifts, influencing voter alignment.

Doe and Jones (2018) take a different approach, examining the historical context of Texas politics in "The Lone Star Legacy: A Historical Analysis of Political Trends." Their work sheds light on the evolution of political leanings in the state, from its storied cowboy past to its modern urban landscape.

But hold onto your 10-gallon hats, because we're about to veer into unexpected territory. While most studies focus on conventional political variables, our research takes a wild ride into the uncharted territory of wellhead pumpers. This unconventional approach may seem as outlandish as trying to wrangle a bucking bronco in a cattle pen, but fear not, dear reader – we're about to bust open some barn doors and explore the untold story of the wellhead pumpers' influence on Texas politics.

Drawing inspiration from non-fiction books like "Drilling for Votes: The Untold Story of Wellhead Pumpers in Texas" and "The Political Gush: Unearthing the Influence of Oil Workers in Texas," we launched into our investigation with the fervor of a prospector striking oil. In the realm of fiction, the echoes of political intrigue and clandestine influence can be found in works like "The Petro Puzzle" and "Texas Tango: A Tale of Power, Petroleum, and Politics," adding a touch of drama and mystery to our scholarly pursuits.

An unexpected twist that set our imaginations ablaze came from the realm of board games, specifically "Oil Tycoon: The Texas Trail" and "Political Pumper Palooza." While not traditional sources of academic inquiry, these games sparked our curiosity and reminded us that the connection between politics and petroleum is truly an untamed frontier, ripe for scholarly exploration.

As we sifted through the literary landscape, it became clear that our research was poised to unleash a tsunami of revelatory insights. So, stock up on your supply of puns, get ready to ride the wave of unexpected correlations, and prepare to embark on a rollicking adventure through the nexus of Texas politics and the enigmatic wellhead pumpers. Yeehaw!


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2003 to 2020

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]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
"Y'all ready for a wild ride through the heart of Texas politics and petroleum? Don your cowboy hat and saddle up because in this paper, we're delving into the curious correlation between Democrat support for Senators in the Lone Star State and the population of wellhead pumpers.
Now, some might say this connection is as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but hold onto your 10-gallon hats because our research is about to lasso some unexpected insights. We've crunched the numbers, swung around some statistical lassos, and rounded up some rather surprising findings. As we rustle through the data from 2003 to 2020, we've uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and a p-value of less than 0.01.
Critics might say we're just blowing hot air, but we assure you, this ain't no tall tale. Our findings are as real as a Texas-sized steak. We promise to keep the puns flowing faster than a geyser and the correlations tighter than a rodeo cowboy's grip, so buckle up for a rollicking ride through the intersection of politics and petroleum.
So, grab your spurs and get ready to wrangle with the unexpected as we uncover the fascinating connection between Democrat votes and the unseen heroes of Texas' oil fields. It's time to pump up the votes and harness the power of wellhead pumpers in the whirlwind of Texas politics!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unearth the enigmatic correlation between Democrat support for Senators in Texas and the population of wellhead pumpers, our research team embarked on a wild and woolly data collection journey. Our methodology entailed conducting a comprehensive search and rescue mission across numerous data sources, embracing the digital wilderness like intrepid explorers of the information frontier. We scoured the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, rode into the depths of the Harvard Dataverse, and even wrangled some statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It was a harrowing adventure through the digital expanse, but we emerged victorious with a treasure trove of data spanning from 2003 to 2020.

With our data in hand, our team's first step was to don our statistical stetsons and wrangle the numbers into submission. We employed a robust and sophisticated approach, employing advanced statistical software to corral the unruly data points and calculate the correlation coefficient and p-value. Our analytical journey involved rustling up data cleansing techniques, herding outlier detection methods, and lassoing together a thorough analysis that would make even the most seasoned cowboys tip their hats in admiration.

Once our team had rounded up the data and tamed the statistical beasts, we conducted an intricate and rigorous analysis. We employed regression models, hypothesis testing, and a range of statistical techniques to tease out the hidden relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and the population of wellhead pumpers. Our approach allowed us to delve deep into the heart of the data, uncovering insights that were as surprising as stumbling upon a wild buffalo in the concrete jungle of statistical analysis.

In addition to the quantitative analysis, our methodology also involved qualitative exploration. We engaged in interviews with stakeholders in the political and petroleum spheres of Texas, immersing ourselves in the local knowledge and anecdotes that painted a vibrant picture of the intersection between political leanings and the unseen champions of the oil fields. These interviews added a colorful layer to our analysis, enriching our understanding and providing valuable context to accompany our statistical findings.

The culmination of our methodology involved synthesizing the quantitative and qualitative findings into a comprehensive and cohesive narrative. Like master storytellers weaving a tapestry of data and insights, we assembled our findings into a captivating account that would charm readers and illuminate the unexpected relationship between Democrat support for Senators and the unsung heroes of Texas' oil industry.

In summary, our methodology involved a daring expedition through data sources, a rigorous statistical showdown, and a lively qualitative exploration to uncover the captivating correlation between Democrat votes and wellhead pumpers. With our methodology as a trusty steed, we ventured fearlessly into the wilds of data analysis, emerging victorious with findings that will surely ignite excitement and curiosity in the hearts of our readers.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .

For the time period 2003 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9712986, r-squared of 0.9434209, 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]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
"Y'all ready for a wild ride through the heart of Texas politics and petroleum? Don your cowboy hat and saddle up because in this paper, we're delving into the curious correlation between Democrat support for Senators in the Lone Star State and the population of wellhead pumpers.
Now, some might say this connection is as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but hold onto your 10-gallon hats because our research is about to lasso some unexpected insights. We've crunched the numbers, swung around some statistical lassos, and rounded up some rather surprising findings. As we rustle through the data from 2003 to 2020, we've uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and a p-value of less than 0.01.
Critics might say we're just blowing hot air, but we assure you, this ain't no tall tale. Our findings are as real as a Texas-sized steak. We promise to keep the puns flowing faster than a geyser and the correlations tighter than a rodeo cowboy's grip, so buckle up for a rollicking ride through the intersection of politics and petroleum.
So, grab your spurs and get ready to wrangle with the unexpected as we uncover the fascinating connection between Democrat votes and the unseen heroes of Texas' oil fields. It's time to pump up the votes and harness the power of wellhead pumpers in the whirlwind of Texas politics!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our results reveal a striking correlation between Democrat support for Senators in Texas and the wellhead pumpers population. The correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and an r-squared of 0.9434209 for the years 2003 to 2020 emphasize the strong relationship between these seemingly divergent variables. This finding suggests that the number of wellhead pumpers is significantly tied to the political landscape, proving that there's more to Texan politics than meets the eye.

As depicted in Fig. 1, our scatterplot illustrates the robust connection between the two variables. The data points resemble stars in the Texan night sky, forming a constellation of correlation that is as undeniable as it is unexpected. We were astounded by the clarity of relationship, much like a crystal-clear, sweet Texas tea.

Furthermore, our findings present novel insights into the intricate dance between political preferences and the underground workforce of the oil industry. You could say we struck liquid gold with this discovery – uncovering a gushing revelation that defies conventional wisdom and tickles the funny bone.

In conclusion, our research not only supports the link between Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and the number of wellhead pumpers but also invites further exploration into the intersection of politics and petroleum. It's clear that the influence of wellhead pumpers in Texas goes beyond oil extraction, extending underground to play a pivotal role in the state's political dynamics. So, saddle up, partners, as we journey into the uncharted terrain of Texas politics and pump up our understanding of its curious connections.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In the riveting world of political science, Smith et al. (2015) set out to uncover the factors influencing voter behavior in Texas. Their study, "Voter Affiliation and Political Identity in the Lone Star State," delves deep into the intricacies of partisan support in the region. Making use of advanced statistical models and rigorous survey data, the authors find a myriad of factors, from socioeconomic status to demographic shifts, influencing voter alignment.
Doe and Jones (2018) take a different approach, examining the historical context of Texas politics in "The Lone Star Legacy: A Historical Analysis of Political Trends." Their work sheds light on the evolution of political leanings in the state, from its storied cowboy past to its modern urban landscape.
But hold onto your 10-gallon hats, because we're about to veer into unexpected territory. While most studies focus on conventional political variables, our research takes a wild ride into the uncharted territory of wellhead pumpers. This unconventional approach may seem as outlandish as trying to wrangle a bucking bronco in a cattle pen, but fear not, dear reader – we're about to bust open some barn doors and explore the untold story of the wellhead pumpers' influence on Texas politics.
Drawing inspiration from non-fiction books like "Drilling for Votes: The Untold Story of Wellhead Pumpers in Texas" and "The Political Gush: Unearthing the Influence of Oil Workers in Texas," we launched into our investigation with the fervor of a prospector striking oil. In the realm of fiction, the echoes of political intrigue and clandestine influence can be found in works like "The Petro Puzzle" and "Texas Tango: A Tale of Power, Petroleum, and Politics," adding a touch of drama and mystery to our scholarly pursuits.
An unexpected twist that set our imaginations ablaze came from the realm of board games, specifically "Oil Tycoon: The Texas Trail" and "Political Pumper Palooza." While not traditional sources of academic inquiry, these games sparked our curiosity and reminded us that the connection between politics and petroleum is truly an untamed frontier, ripe for scholarly exploration.
As we sifted through the literary landscape, it became clear that our research was poised to unleash a tsunami of revelatory insights. So, stock up on your supply of puns, get ready to ride the wave of unexpected correlations, and prepare to embark on a rollicking adventure through the nexus of Texas politics and the enigmatic wellhead pumpers. Yeehaw!

[[RESULTS]]
Our results reveal a striking correlation between Democrat support for Senators in Texas and the wellhead pumpers population. The correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and an r-squared of 0.9434209 for the years 2003 to 2020 emphasize the strong relationship between these seemingly divergent variables. This finding suggests that the number of wellhead pumpers is significantly tied to the political landscape, proving that there's more to Texan politics than meets the eye.
As depicted in Fig. 1, our scatterplot illustrates the robust connection between the two variables. The data points resemble stars in the Texan night sky, forming a constellation of correlation that is as undeniable as it is unexpected. We were astounded by the clarity of relationship, much like a crystal-clear, sweet Texas tea.
Furthermore, our findings present novel insights into the intricate dance between political preferences and the underground workforce of the oil industry. You could say we struck liquid gold with this discovery – uncovering a gushing revelation that defies conventional wisdom and tickles the funny bone.
In conclusion, our research not only supports the link between Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and the number of wellhead pumpers but also invites further exploration into the intersection of politics and petroleum. It's clear that the influence of wellhead pumpers in Texas goes beyond oil extraction, extending underground to play a pivotal role in the state's political dynamics. So, saddle up, partners, as we journey into the uncharted terrain of Texas politics and pump up our understanding of its curious connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Yeehaw, partner! Hold onto your 10-gallon hats because we're about to gush over the unexpected correlation we've unearthed between Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and the number of wellhead pumpers. Our results not only tickle the funny bone but also support previous research that has delved into the wild and woolly world of Texas politics.

Taking a cue from Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2018), who wrangled with the intricacies of voter behavior and the historical legacy of Texas politics, our research corralled some outlandishly unorthodox variables – the wellhead pumpers. Much like a daring cowboy riding into uncharted territory, we bravely ventured into this unexplored realm, guided by literary inspirations and board games that galloped through our imaginations.

Our findings gallop hand in hand with prior research, echoing the sentiments of knowledge-seekers who came before us. In a surprising turn of events, we not only saddle up with the established conventions of political research but also spur ahead into uncharted territory. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 might just be the lone star that shines a light on the untold tale of wellhead pumpers in Texas.

The striking relationship we uncovered is as clear as a Texan day, defying conventional wisdom and proving that there's more to Texas politics than meets the eye. As we pondered the scatterplot, we couldn't help but think of the Texan night sky, with its stars forming a constellation of correlation that is as undeniable as it is unexpected.

In conclusion, our findings pump up the conversation about the intersection of politics and petroleum. Our research uncovers a gushing revelation that goes beyond oil extraction, reminding us that the influence of wellhead pumpers extends underground to play a pivotal role in the state's political dynamics. So saddle up, partners, as we mosey into the uncharted terrain of Texas politics, armed with our newfound understanding of its quirky connections. It's like a barrel of laughs, but with a Texas twist!


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
"Y'all ready for a wild ride through the heart of Texas politics and petroleum? Don your cowboy hat and saddle up because in this paper, we're delving into the curious correlation between Democrat support for Senators in the Lone Star State and the population of wellhead pumpers.
Now, some might say this connection is as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but hold onto your 10-gallon hats because our research is about to lasso some unexpected insights. We've crunched the numbers, swung around some statistical lassos, and rounded up some rather surprising findings. As we rustle through the data from 2003 to 2020, we've uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and a p-value of less than 0.01.
Critics might say we're just blowing hot air, but we assure you, this ain't no tall tale. Our findings are as real as a Texas-sized steak. We promise to keep the puns flowing faster than a geyser and the correlations tighter than a rodeo cowboy's grip, so buckle up for a rollicking ride through the intersection of politics and petroleum.
So, grab your spurs and get ready to wrangle with the unexpected as we uncover the fascinating connection between Democrat votes and the unseen heroes of Texas' oil fields. It's time to pump up the votes and harness the power of wellhead pumpers in the whirlwind of Texas politics!"

[[RESULTS]]
Our results reveal a striking correlation between Democrat support for Senators in Texas and the wellhead pumpers population. The correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and an r-squared of 0.9434209 for the years 2003 to 2020 emphasize the strong relationship between these seemingly divergent variables. This finding suggests that the number of wellhead pumpers is significantly tied to the political landscape, proving that there's more to Texan politics than meets the eye.
As depicted in Fig. 1, our scatterplot illustrates the robust connection between the two variables. The data points resemble stars in the Texan night sky, forming a constellation of correlation that is as undeniable as it is unexpected. We were astounded by the clarity of relationship, much like a crystal-clear, sweet Texas tea.
Furthermore, our findings present novel insights into the intricate dance between political preferences and the underground workforce of the oil industry. You could say we struck liquid gold with this discovery – uncovering a gushing revelation that defies conventional wisdom and tickles the funny bone.
In conclusion, our research not only supports the link between Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and the number of wellhead pumpers but also invites further exploration into the intersection of politics and petroleum. It's clear that the influence of wellhead pumpers in Texas goes beyond oil extraction, extending underground to play a pivotal role in the state's political dynamics. So, saddle up, partners, as we journey into the uncharted terrain of Texas politics and pump up our understanding of its curious connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

Well, folks, it looks like we've struck oil with our findings – the correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Texas and the number of wellhead pumpers is as strong as a cowboy's handshake. Who would have thought that the political landscape of the Lone Star State could be tied so closely to these underground workhorses? It just goes to show that Texas politics truly does run deep, much like those oil wells.

Our research has uncorked a geyser of unexpected insights, proving that there's more to Texas than just big hats and barbecue. We've turned over more rocks than a Texas horned lizard, and what did we find? A correlation coefficient so high, it's practically touching the clouds.

As we wrap up our rodeo through the data, it's clear that our findings have backed up the old saying – everything's bigger in Texas, including the impact of wellhead pumpers on political preferences. It seems that in the Lone Star State, even the most underground of jobs can bubble up and influence the voting landscape.

So, dear readers, it's time to hang up our spurs and lassos – our journey through the wild terrain of Texas politics and petroleum has come to a close. The evidence speaks for itself, and it's high time we put this particular correlation conundrum to bed.

In conclusion, our findings suggest that there's no need to pump more resources into this particular correlation. We've already hit paydirt, and it's time to mosey on to the next wild and woolly research adventure. Let's call this one a wrap, partner!


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 Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Demographics and Societal Trends


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 Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Texas Political Studies


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 Pump Up the Votes: The Political Correlation Between Democrat Support for Senators in Texas and the Wellhead Pumpers Population with an abstract of In this whimsical yet thought-provoking study, we explore the unexpected connection between Democrat votes for Senators in the Lone Star State and the number of wellhead pumpers. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team delves into the correlation coefficient of 0.9712986 and p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2020. As we pump up our analysis, we unravel the tantalizing relationship between political affinity and the underground workhorses of Texas. Our findings reveal surprising insights that will surely make our readers oil up their curiosity and gush over the interplay of politics and petroleum. Prepare to dive into a whirlwind of puns, correlations, and unexpected discoveries as we uncover the untapped potential of wellhead pumpers in the electoral landscape of Texas.

ChatGPT:

Democrat support Texas Senators, wellhead pumpers correlation, Democrat votes Texas wellhead pumpers, political affinity wellhead pumpers, Texas Senator support wellhead pumpers, Democrat voter correlation wellhead pumpers, Texas politics wellhead pumpers, correlation wellhead pumpers Democrat votes, wellhead pumper population Texas, political correlation Texas wellhead pumpers

*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

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

The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of wellhead pumpers in Texas
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas

Correlation r = 0.9712986 (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 = 0.9434209 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Texas) over the 6 years from 2003 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0012. 0.0012238363133246254000000000
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 0.97 in 0.12% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 817 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 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.

[ 0.75, 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.
200620082012201420182020
Votes for Democratic Senators in Texas (Percentage of votes)36.044642.837940.62334.364548.325443.8689
The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas (Wellhead Pumpers)367057604310290066105220




Why this works

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




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([36.0446,42.8379,40.623,34.3645,48.3254,43.8689,])
array_2 = np.array([3670,5760,4310,2900,6610,5220,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Texas"
array_2_name = "The number of wellhead pumpers in Texas"

# 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?

Cheers to you for rating this correlation!


Correlation ID: 4722 · Black Variable ID: 26465 · Red Variable ID: 14961
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0