Critical Reasoning

Zelda: Dr. Ladlow, a research psychologist, has convincingly demonstrated that his theory about the determinants of rat behaviour generates consistently accurate predictions about how rats will perform in a maze. On the basis of this evidence Dr. Ladlow has claimed that his theory is irrefutably correct.
Anson: Then Dr. Ladlow is not responsible psychologist. Dr. Ladlow"Ÿs evidence does not conclusively prove that his theory is correct. Responsible psychologists always accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect.
Which one of the following can be properly inferred from Anson"Ÿs argument?
(A) Dr. Ladlow"Ÿs evidence that his theory generates consistently accurate predictions about how rates will perform in a maze is inaccurate
(B) Psychologists who can derive consistently accurate predictions about how rats will perform in a maze from their theories cannot responsibly conclude that those theories cannot be disproved
(C) No matter how responsible psychologists are, they can never develop correct theoretical explanations.
(D) Responsible psychologists do not make predictions about how rats will perform in a maze
(E) Psychologists who accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect are responsible psychologists.


[spoiler]I shortlisted between B and E and finally chose E can someone tell me why E is wrong isn't E just reproduction of the last line of Anson's argument. I read many times that in inference questions never select an answer choice which repeats something already stated in the text may be you guys can help me out with this concept..BTW OA is B[/spoiler]