Andi Claims That Phrenology Was a Pseudoscience Rather Than a Science.The

Andi claims that phrenology was a pseudoscience rather than a science.The best support for her opinion is the fact that the theory wasn't empirically testable because:

A) when phrenologists found large "stealing" bumps,but the person was not a thief,then they concluded that other bumps held this characteristic in check.
B) most of the phrenologists received inadequate training in the careful analysis of head bumps and so there was too much variation for accurate prediction.
C) the phrenologists relied heavily on the theories of the British naturalistic,Charles Darwin,and yet they could not link the bumps to evolutionary adaptation.
D) When "bumps" did not accurately explain a person's characteristics,the phrenologists explained the contradiction by hypothesizing traumatic childhood experiences.