Spurious correlation #5,554 · 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 Montana and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

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 Montana and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

The uptick in Democrat votes for Senators in Montana sparked a sudden interest in polar travel, as residents started dreaming of a political shift towards cooler climates. As the political landscape in Montana seemed to align more with the icy expanse of Antarctica, people couldn't help but wonder if there was a direct flight from the Big Sky Country to the land of penguins. It's as if they hoped to ride a blue wave all the way to the southernmost continent, where even politics freeze over!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ Concept art ] Create an image of a minimalist, rural Montana landscape with a voting booth set against a backdrop of rolling hills. People are lined up casting their ballots for Democratic Senators, clear blue skies overhead. Juxtaposed with this scene, depict a computer screen displaying multiple Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica". The imagery should convey the contrasting desires of political change and the curiosity about traveling to the icy continent. The scene should symbolize the residents' longing for a shift to cooler climates both politically and geographically through a simple and evocative visual. 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: Votes for Democratic Senators in Montana and Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. 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: inspired by bauhaus Low poly Concept art Psychedelic Scalar art
ChatGPT: Concept art

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 Votes for Democratic Senators in Montana and Google searches for 'how to get to antartica', in the following situation: The uptick in Democrat votes for Senators in Montana sparked a sudden interest in polar travel, as residents started dreaming of a political shift towards cooler climates. As the political landscape in Montana seemed to align more with the icy expanse of Antarctica, people couldn't help but wonder if there was a direct flight from the Big Sky Country to the land of penguins. It's as if they hoped to ride a blue wave all the way to the southernmost continent, where even politics freeze over!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Montana, a voting booth with a line of people casting ballots for Democratic Senators is juxtaposed with a computer screen showing multiple Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." The scene conveys the juxtaposition of residents' interest in political change and their newfound curiosity about traveling to the icy continent, symbolizing a desire for a shift to cooler climates both politically and geographically.

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: [ Concept art ] and depicting this scene: In Montana, a voting booth with a line of people casting ballots for Democratic Senators is juxtaposed with a computer screen showing multiple Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." The scene conveys the juxtaposition of residents' interest in political change and their newfound curiosity about traveling to the icy continent, symbolizing a desire for a shift to cooler climates both politically and geographically. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ Concept art ] Create an image of a minimalist, rural Montana landscape with a voting booth set against a backdrop of rolling hills. People are lined up casting their ballots for Democratic Senators, clear blue skies overhead. Juxtaposed with this scene, depict a computer screen displaying multiple Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica". The imagery should convey the contrasting desires of political change and the curiosity about traveling to the icy continent. The scene should symbolize the residents' longing for a shift to cooler climates both politically and geographically through a simple and evocative visual.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 Montana caused how to get to antartica (Google searches for 'how to get to antartica') to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations

The Journal of Polar Politics and Pioneering Politicians

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} 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 dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Montana and Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. 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. Then you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavored to explore the enigmatic relationship between Democrats' votes for Senators in the state of Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our research team conducted a thorough analysis spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting a significant association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. From the rugged landscapes of the Treasure State to the remote wilderness of Antarctica, our study unveils an unexpected link that piques curiosity and invites a playful interpretation of the intertwined dynamics of politics and wanderlust. We elucidate the implications of this unlikely connection while pondering the nuanced motivations that drive Montanans towards both the ballot box and the quest for polar adventure.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of politics and polar exploration is not a well-trodden path in the realm of academic inquiry. Yet, in a testament to the delightful absurdities of the research world, our study unearths a curious correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the peculiar penchant for Googling "how to get to Antarctica." It appears that the political landscape of Montana is not the only rugged terrain that captures the interest of its inhabitants. From the chilly ballot boxes of state elections to the frosty allure of the Earth's southernmost continent, the nexus between these seemingly disparate domains elicits an array of bemused reactions and a flurry of head-scratching exclamations.
In the fascinating tapestry of Montana's political dynamics, the Democrats' struggles and successes have been the subject of scrutiny, speculation, and perhaps a touch of wistful yearning. Meanwhile, the siren call of Antarctica, with its icy splendor and remoteness, has beckoned adventurers, explorers, and, curiously, a contingent of internet surfers in the Treasure State. As we venture into this uncharted thematic territory, we aim to unravel the conundrum of why these seemingly unrelated phenomena coalesce in a manner that can best be described as delightfully perplexing.
The looming question that precipitates our investigation: What motivates the denizens of Montana to express their political preferences alongside an inquisitive yearning for polar escapades? Is there an implicit desire for change that traverses both the political and geographical landscapes? Or, perhaps, it is a testament to the human proclivity for unexpected juxtapositions, where the frigid call of the poles intermingles with the heat of political discourse. Regardless, we embark on this expedition of inquiry with a sense of reverence for the enigmatic interplay of human interests that unfolds before us.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Voting Patterns in Montana" by Smith, the authors find a comprehensive analysis of the political landscape in Montana, delving into the historical trends and demographic factors that shape the state's voting behaviors. While the focus of the study is on party affiliations and voting preferences, it provides a valuable backdrop for examining the curious alliance of Montanans' political inclinations and their unlikely interest in polar pursuits.

Moreover, in "Search Queries and Travel Preferences" by Doe, the authors present an exploration of online search behaviors related to travel destinations. The study offers insights into the motivations behind individuals' search queries for distinct geographical locales. However, the connection between such search patterns and political inclinations remains uncharted territory in the scholarly arena, leaving ample room for our own investigative foray.

Jones, in "The Antarctic Odyssey of Political Thought," embarks on an evocative journey through the lens of political philosophy, tracing the unexpected parallels between the yearnings for ideological progress and the yearnings for uncharted, icy expanses. While Jones' work primarily imbues the reader with a sense of intellectual curiosity, it inadvertently sets the stage for our exploration into the labyrinthine corridors of Montanan democratic expressions and Antarctic aspirations.

Turning to the realm of non-fiction literature, works such as "Endurance: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage" and "Into the Wild" provide captivating narratives of human resilience and exploration in inhospitable climates, offering a tangential yet evocative backdrop for contemplating the whimsical union of voting proclivities and icy allure.

On the fictional front, titles like "The Golden Compass" and "The Subtle Knife" hover on the periphery of relevance, with their fantastical realms and traversing of parallel dimensions, serving as a metaphorical parallel to the multidimensional facets of Montanans' political choices and search for Antarctic navigation tips.

Not to be overlooked are the eccentric musings of popular cartoons and children's shows. A thorough examination of "Dora the Explorer" and "The Magic School Bus" imparts unexpected wisdom on navigation, adventure, and the ever-inquisitive nature of the human spirit, offering subtle insights into the intricate tapestry of wanderlust that we endeavor to unravel.

As our study unfolds, we delve into a surreptitiously merry dance between serious scholarly undertakings and the delightfully whimsical confluence of politics and polar yearnings, inviting the reader to partake in a lighthearted intellectual expedition unlike any other.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Montana and Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. 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 Google Trends . You used data from 2004 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]]
Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavored to explore the enigmatic relationship between Democrats' votes for Senators in the state of Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our research team conducted a thorough analysis spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting a significant association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. From the rugged landscapes of the Treasure State to the remote wilderness of Antarctica, our study unveils an unexpected link that piques curiosity and invites a playful interpretation of the intertwined dynamics of politics and wanderlust. We elucidate the implications of this unlikely connection while pondering the nuanced motivations that drive Montanans towards both the ballot box and the quest for polar adventure.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of politics and polar exploration is not a well-trodden path in the realm of academic inquiry. Yet, in a testament to the delightful absurdities of the research world, our study unearths a curious correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the peculiar penchant for Googling "how to get to Antarctica." It appears that the political landscape of Montana is not the only rugged terrain that captures the interest of its inhabitants. From the chilly ballot boxes of state elections to the frosty allure of the Earth's southernmost continent, the nexus between these seemingly disparate domains elicits an array of bemused reactions and a flurry of head-scratching exclamations.
In the fascinating tapestry of Montana's political dynamics, the Democrats' struggles and successes have been the subject of scrutiny, speculation, and perhaps a touch of wistful yearning. Meanwhile, the siren call of Antarctica, with its icy splendor and remoteness, has beckoned adventurers, explorers, and, curiously, a contingent of internet surfers in the Treasure State. As we venture into this uncharted thematic territory, we aim to unravel the conundrum of why these seemingly unrelated phenomena coalesce in a manner that can best be described as delightfully perplexing.
The looming question that precipitates our investigation: What motivates the denizens of Montana to express their political preferences alongside an inquisitive yearning for polar escapades? Is there an implicit desire for change that traverses both the political and geographical landscapes? Or, perhaps, it is a testament to the human proclivity for unexpected juxtapositions, where the frigid call of the poles intermingles with the heat of political discourse. Regardless, we embark on this expedition of inquiry with a sense of reverence for the enigmatic interplay of human interests that unfolds before us.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

The methodology employed in this study was as formidable as the rugged landscapes of Montana and as meticulously structured as an ambitious Antarctic expedition. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our research team embarked on a grand quest to unravel the enigmatic relationship between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica."

To measure the fluctuations in Democratic votes for Senators in Montana from 2004 to 2020, we gathered data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, which provided a treasure trove of electoral statistics. The state of Montana, known for its majestic mountain ranges and wide-open spaces, presented an intriguing backdrop for our investigation. Meanwhile, the Harvard Dataverse served as an invaluable source for acquiring comprehensive data on various socioeconomic indicators and demographic factors that could potentially influence political preferences.

The crux of our endeavor, the Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica," was excavated from the depths of Google Trends. This peculiar pursuit of polar exploration served as a whimsical yet telling metric to gauge the overlap between political inclinations and aspirations for Antarctic adventures. The Google Trends data provided a chronological sequence of search interest over time, effectively capturing the ebb and flow of curiosity regarding Antarctic travel.

We employed advanced statistical analyses, including correlation coefficients and regression models, to untangle the web of association between these seemingly incongruous phenomena. The correlation coefficient, with its precise numerical representation of the strength and direction of the relationship, stood as a sturdy guidepost in our journey through the data wilderness. The p-value, that elusive measure of statistical significance, lent an aura of certainty to our findings, affirming the substantial connection between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the fervent yearning to discover the icy realms of Antarctica.

In addition to these quantitative techniques, qualitative analyses were also undertaken to extract the underlying motivations and narratives that underpin this captivating correlation. Through a process of thematic coding and in-depth scrutiny of political and travel-related discourse, we sought to illuminate the nuanced threads of connection that weave through the electoral choices of Montanans and their aspirational musings about Antarctic exploration.

We acknowledge the inherent limitations of utilizing aggregated data from disparate sources, as well as the caveats associated with inferring causation from correlation. Nevertheless, our methodology stood as a testament to the tenacity of scholarly inquiry and the audacity of pursuing uncharted intellectual frontiers.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Montana and Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. 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]]
Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavored to explore the enigmatic relationship between Democrats' votes for Senators in the state of Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our research team conducted a thorough analysis spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting a significant association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. From the rugged landscapes of the Treasure State to the remote wilderness of Antarctica, our study unveils an unexpected link that piques curiosity and invites a playful interpretation of the intertwined dynamics of politics and wanderlust. We elucidate the implications of this unlikely connection while pondering the nuanced motivations that drive Montanans towards both the ballot box and the quest for polar adventure.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Voting Patterns in Montana" by Smith, the authors find a comprehensive analysis of the political landscape in Montana, delving into the historical trends and demographic factors that shape the state's voting behaviors. While the focus of the study is on party affiliations and voting preferences, it provides a valuable backdrop for examining the curious alliance of Montanans' political inclinations and their unlikely interest in polar pursuits.
Moreover, in "Search Queries and Travel Preferences" by Doe, the authors present an exploration of online search behaviors related to travel destinations. The study offers insights into the motivations behind individuals' search queries for distinct geographical locales. However, the connection between such search patterns and political inclinations remains uncharted territory in the scholarly arena, leaving ample room for our own investigative foray.
Jones, in "The Antarctic Odyssey of Political Thought," embarks on an evocative journey through the lens of political philosophy, tracing the unexpected parallels between the yearnings for ideological progress and the yearnings for uncharted, icy expanses. While Jones' work primarily imbues the reader with a sense of intellectual curiosity, it inadvertently sets the stage for our exploration into the labyrinthine corridors of Montanan democratic expressions and Antarctic aspirations.
Turning to the realm of non-fiction literature, works such as "Endurance: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage" and "Into the Wild" provide captivating narratives of human resilience and exploration in inhospitable climates, offering a tangential yet evocative backdrop for contemplating the whimsical union of voting proclivities and icy allure.
On the fictional front, titles like "The Golden Compass" and "The Subtle Knife" hover on the periphery of relevance, with their fantastical realms and traversing of parallel dimensions, serving as a metaphorical parallel to the multidimensional facets of Montanans' political choices and search for Antarctic navigation tips.
Not to be overlooked are the eccentric musings of popular cartoons and children's shows. A thorough examination of "Dora the Explorer" and "The Magic School Bus" imparts unexpected wisdom on navigation, adventure, and the ever-inquisitive nature of the human spirit, offering subtle insights into the intricate tapestry of wanderlust that we endeavor to unravel.
As our study unfolds, we delve into a surreptitiously merry dance between serious scholarly undertakings and the delightfully whimsical confluence of politics and polar yearnings, inviting the reader to partake in a lighthearted intellectual expedition unlike any other.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends yielded an intriguing insight into the relationship between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." The findings point to a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and an r-squared value of 0.9285442, indicating that approximately 92.9% of the variation in Google searches for Antarctic travel can be explained by the variation in Democratic votes for Senators in Montana. Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence for the statistical significance of this association.
The scatterplot depicted in Figure 1 illustrates the robust correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables, providing a visual representation of the surprising saga that unfolds between Montana's political landscape and the allure of Antarctic expeditions. It is worth noting that the scatterplot resembles a map charting the uncharted territory of this distinctive relationship, with data points resembling intrepid explorers venturing into the unknown.
The results of this analysis prompt us to contemplate the quizzical confluence of political engagement and polar fascination in the context of Montana. Whether it is the yearning for change expressed through ballot boxes or the yearning for adventure expressed through Google searches, the people of Montana appear to harbor a fervent curiosity that transcends traditional boundaries. This startling correlation embodies a peculiar harmony between the democratic process and the allure of the world's most remote and enigmatic continent, inviting further exploration into the depths of human curiosity and the whims of the digital age.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study underscore the captivating correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." The remarkably strong correlation coefficient and the statistical significance of this association resonate with the findings of prior research, offering a whimsical validation of seemingly lighthearted literature that we approached with unanticipated earnestness.

Smith's comprehensive analysis of voting patterns in Montana set the stage for our investigation, delving into the historical trends and demographic factors that shape the state's political landscape. While focusing on party affiliations and voting preferences, Smith's work hinted at the unpredictable undercurrents that influence Montanans' political inclinations. Our findings provide an amusing yet compelling affirmation of Smith's observations, suggesting that the proclivities of Montanans extend beyond the ballot box into the realm of Antarctic intrigue.

Drawing from Doe's exploration of online search behaviors related to travel destinations, our study unveils a surprising parallel between the motivations behind individuals' search queries and their political inclinations. The resonance between Doe's insights and our findings engages in an unexpected tango, highlighting the interconnected facets of human curiosity that transcend the boundaries of conventional scholarly inquiry.

Moreover, Jones' evocative journey through the Antarctic Odyssey of Political Thought inadvertently foreshadowed our revelation of Montanans' subtle affinity for Antarctic aspirations. While Jones' work primarily spurred intellectual curiosity, our study infuses this intellectual intrigue with a playfully quixotic twist, solidifying the unanticipated ties between political yearnings and icy allure.

Turning to the realm of non-fiction literature, the captivating narratives of human resilience and exploration in inhospitable climates captured in "Endurance: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage" and "Into the Wild" lent a tangential yet evocative backdrop for contemplating the whimsical union of voting proclivities and icy allure. Our findings intertwine with these narratives, enriching the landscape of human curiosity with an unexpected kinship between politics and polar prospects.

Indeed, our study emerges as an intellectual expedition unlike any other, drawing from diverse sources—both solemn and whimsical—to stitch together a narrative that humorously waltzes between scholarly rigor and lighthearted intrigue. The unexpected harmony between the democratic process and the allure of the world's most remote and enigmatic continent invites further exploration into the capricious spirit of human curiosity, proving that beneath the surface of our sober academic endeavors lies a delightfully unexpected dance of data and merriment.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Montana and Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'. 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]]
Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavored to explore the enigmatic relationship between Democrats' votes for Senators in the state of Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our research team conducted a thorough analysis spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting a significant association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. From the rugged landscapes of the Treasure State to the remote wilderness of Antarctica, our study unveils an unexpected link that piques curiosity and invites a playful interpretation of the intertwined dynamics of politics and wanderlust. We elucidate the implications of this unlikely connection while pondering the nuanced motivations that drive Montanans towards both the ballot box and the quest for polar adventure.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of politics and polar exploration is not a well-trodden path in the realm of academic inquiry. Yet, in a testament to the delightful absurdities of the research world, our study unearths a curious correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the peculiar penchant for Googling "how to get to Antarctica." It appears that the political landscape of Montana is not the only rugged terrain that captures the interest of its inhabitants. From the chilly ballot boxes of state elections to the frosty allure of the Earth's southernmost continent, the nexus between these seemingly disparate domains elicits an array of bemused reactions and a flurry of head-scratching exclamations.
In the fascinating tapestry of Montana's political dynamics, the Democrats' struggles and successes have been the subject of scrutiny, speculation, and perhaps a touch of wistful yearning. Meanwhile, the siren call of Antarctica, with its icy splendor and remoteness, has beckoned adventurers, explorers, and, curiously, a contingent of internet surfers in the Treasure State. As we venture into this uncharted thematic territory, we aim to unravel the conundrum of why these seemingly unrelated phenomena coalesce in a manner that can best be described as delightfully perplexing.
The looming question that precipitates our investigation: What motivates the denizens of Montana to express their political preferences alongside an inquisitive yearning for polar escapades? Is there an implicit desire for change that traverses both the political and geographical landscapes? Or, perhaps, it is a testament to the human proclivity for unexpected juxtapositions, where the frigid call of the poles intermingles with the heat of political discourse. Regardless, we embark on this expedition of inquiry with a sense of reverence for the enigmatic interplay of human interests that unfolds before us.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends yielded an intriguing insight into the relationship between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." The findings point to a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and an r-squared value of 0.9285442, indicating that approximately 92.9% of the variation in Google searches for Antarctic travel can be explained by the variation in Democratic votes for Senators in Montana. Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence for the statistical significance of this association.
The scatterplot depicted in Figure 1 illustrates the robust correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables, providing a visual representation of the surprising saga that unfolds between Montana's political landscape and the allure of Antarctic expeditions. It is worth noting that the scatterplot resembles a map charting the uncharted territory of this distinctive relationship, with data points resembling intrepid explorers venturing into the unknown.
The results of this analysis prompt us to contemplate the quizzical confluence of political engagement and polar fascination in the context of Montana. Whether it is the yearning for change expressed through ballot boxes or the yearning for adventure expressed through Google searches, the people of Montana appear to harbor a fervent curiosity that transcends traditional boundaries. This startling correlation embodies a peculiar harmony between the democratic process and the allure of the world's most remote and enigmatic continent, inviting further exploration into the depths of human curiosity and the whims of the digital age.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica" unveils a connection that is as captivating as it is confounding. The strong statistical association between these seemingly disparate phenomena suggests a symphony of curiosity and ambiguity that resonates across the rugged landscapes of Montana and the icy allure of Antarctica. It appears that the denizens of the Treasure State harbor not only a penchant for political engagement but also a yearning for polar expedition, creating a peculiar blend of civic duty and adventurous spirit.

As we ponder the implications of this unexpected correlation, one cannot help but marvel at the kaleidoscope of human interests and motivations that intertwine in ways that elude conventional explanation. The ripple of political fervor and the echo of polar fascination converge in a dance of statistical significance, creating a tableau that is as whimsical as it is thought-provoking. It seems that the call of the poles, like the allure of the ballot box, exerts a magnetic pull on the hearts and minds of the intrepid souls of Montana.

While our findings invite a playful interpretation of this unlikely relationship, they also underscore the intriguing complexity of human behavior, as evidenced by the enigmatic union of politics and wanderlust. The scintillating saga of Montana's Democrats and their Antarctic aspirations paints a portrait of humanity that is at once amusing and arresting, embodying the delightful interplay of the serious and the whimsical.

In the grand tapestry of research, our investigation illuminates the whimsical trajectory of human interests, charting a course from the political precincts of Montana to the icy expanse of Antarctica. It is with a mix of bemusement and scholarly curiosity that we delineate this unconventional correlation, standing in awe of the inscrutable interplay between diverse facets of human endeavor.

In light of these findings, we assert that further research in this area is unnecessary, as the delightfully unexpected nature of our results defies the need for additional validation or inquiry. The enigmatic alliance between Democratic votes in Montana and Antarctic aspirations stands as a testament to the beautiful unpredictability of human behavior, inviting us to revel in the whimsicality of our scholarly pursuits.

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 Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Polar Politics and Pioneering Politicians

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 Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Polar Politics and Intrepid Exploration

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 Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations with an abstract of This study endeavored to explore the enigmatic relationship between Democrats' votes for Senators in the state of Montana and the frequency of Google searches for "how to get to Antarctica." Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our research team conducted a thorough analysis spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The findings revealed a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9636100 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting a significant association between these seemingly disparate phenomena. From the rugged landscapes of the Treasure State to the remote wilderness of Antarctica, our study unveils an unexpected link that piques curiosity and invites a playful interpretation of the intertwined dynamics of politics and wanderlust. We elucidate the implications of this unlikely connection while pondering the nuanced motivations that drive Montanans towards both the ballot box and the quest for polar adventure.

ChatGPT:

Montana Democrats, Senators voting habits, how to get to Antarctica, Google search trends, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, correlation coefficient, p-value, Montana wilderness, political motivations, wanderlust, polar adventure, voter behavior, political science, Google search analysis.

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

Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error

Data details

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

Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'how to get to antartica' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'

Correlation r = 0.9636100 (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 = 0.9285442 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 92.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'how to get to antartica') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Montana) over the 6 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.002.^Show 0.0019622580057766260000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.96 in 0.2% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 510 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, ^Note 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.

[ 0.7, 1 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	2006	2008	2012	2014	2018	2020
Votes for Democratic Senators in Montana (Total votes)	199845	348289	236123	148184	253876	272463
Google searches for 'how to get to antartica' (Rel. search volume)	5.16667	8.91667	6.08333	5	6.33333	6.75

Why this works

Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 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.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note 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.
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^Note 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.
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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([199845,348289,236123,148184,253876,272463,])
array_2 = np.array([5.16667,8.91667,6.08333,5,6.33333,6.75,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Montana"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'"

# 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. ^Note 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:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for Democratic Senators in Montana
Line chart for only Google searches for 'how to get to antartica'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Seeking Senators: The Surprising Saga of Montana's Democrats and Daring Antarctic Destinations

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Kudos for rating!

Correlation ID: 5554 · Black Variable ID: 26269 · Red Variable ID: 1475


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: