How Is Not Being Able to Falsify a Creaturely Counterfactual Compatible With Free Will?

How is not being able to falsify a creaturely counterfactual compatible with free will, especially given that you are not responsible for being in the circumstances of the antecedent in the first place? I think i know what it means. It's timg to say, like, if am, you know, if it was true and that you would be, you would give in to the temptation and take the cake. How can that be reconciled with you being free a, to pick one or the other? All right, my microphone should be back. Menhav figured all his stuff out. So all ight, let's get on to the next question. The next