Statistician: Changes in the Sun's luminosity correlate exceedingly we

This is a hard one, I think I'll take E.

can you please explain why E?

The statistician concluded that sun control's earth temperature with a regression. The meteologist dismiss this claim, not after debating why it is wrong, but to appeal to the authority of other meterologists' opinion, saying that they all agree it is impossible.

An example could be this:

A: I found some evidences that lead me to suspect that the scientists are wrong in saying that the earth is round.
B: But all the scientists say that the earth is round.
What B should have done is to look at A's evidences and refute them on their own merit. For all we know all the scientists could be wrong.

How are B and c wrong here? Couldn't get it

Statistician: Changes in the Sun's luminosity correlate exceedingly well with average land temperatures on Earth. Clearly-and contrary to accepted opinion among meteorologist's, the Sun's luminosity essentially controls land temperatures on Earth.

Meteorologist: I disagree. Any professional meteorologist will tell you that in a system as complicated as that giving rise to the climate, no significant aspect can be controlled by a single variable.

The reasoning in the meteorologist's counterargument questionable because that argument

(A) rejects a partial explanation, not because it is incorrect, but only because it is not complete - WRONG. We are not sure about 'partial explanation'; okay may be because of external knowledge we know it is. But, then we would be wrong to do so. Also, incorrectness is similar to applying external knowledge. Finally, completeness is what we might conclude that meteorologist concludes.

(B) fails to distinguish phenomena that exist independently of a particular system from phenomena that exist only as part of the system - WRONG. The word 'independently' is causing major issue.

(C) calls into question the existence of a correlation when the only real issue is that of how to interpret the correlation - WRONG. Meteorologist didn't question the existence of that correlation.

(D) dismisses a hypothesis on the grounds that it fails to deal with any matters of scientific significant - WRONG. Point blank wrong.

(E) appeals to the authoritativeness of an opinion without evaluating the merit of a putative counterexample - CORRECT. Appealing is fine. But reasoning is not debated enough before disagreement.