 Now, to kind of recap what we talked about today, we started, again, reiterating, picking up where we left off last week and thinking about everyday thinking and the intuitive scientist and looking at the world through the eyes, through the methodologies of the scientific method and so with the scientific method there's, this is a way that we kind of need to deal with complex and ambiguous events and one of the complexities and ambiguities that we're dealing with are these ideas of multiple and a pen and error factors which we talked about. Sometimes things are going to work for you, sometimes against and you're going to improve sometimes after a lump of bad events or drop after a bunch of good events and this is just a natural process called regression to the mean and when dealing with regression to the mean, you know, this is just a statistical phenomenon, there's nothing fishy or mysterious or superstitious or magical about it yet we often think that there is, right, when you have a vial of water and you get better, you attribute it to the water, you make these false connections and we do this all of the time and we're starting to get a handle on the cognitive operations for why people believe weird things and what we can do about it and as we've just seen, now we have six leads that we can use when people have strong opinions about these kind of events. What do you do when there's evidence that contradicts a belief that you hold dear? Well this is a starting point, we're going to pick up there next week when we deal as I said with some more challenging types of events with extraordinary claims.