Sorry, I'm sometimes snarky in the mornings. Giving the OP the benefit of the doubt, I presume they meant that correlation does not always equal causation, but

Sorry, I'm sometimes snarky in the mornings. Giving the OP the benefit of the doubt, I presume they meant that correlation does not always equal causation, but that there is a middle ground of the "unknown" rather than just the inverse of a logical, mathematical statement. If you see a pattern from enough correlations, then you might let go of some of your own hubris. It's not black and white, and so on.