Critical Reasoning

Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could be used as a basis for arguing against the author's position that the meteorologist's claim cannot be evaluated?

A)Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanism are not understood.
B)Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts.
C)Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastropic events as volcanic eruptions are beginnning to be constucted.
D)Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.
E)Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.

I am not even able to understand premise here..can someone explain what author is actually trying tell..?

OA later..