Economists Often Evaluate a Theory in Terms of How Consistently

Multiple Choice

Economists often evaluate a theory in terms of how consistently and accurately it predicts what happens.  Implicit in this position is the belief that

A) if the theory's predictions are consistently accurate, then there is a fairly good chance that the theory is a good explanation of how things work.
B) if the theory's predictions are consistently imaccurate, then there is a fairly good chance that the theory will be accepted by others.
C) if the theory's predictions are consistently inaccurate, then there is a fairly good chance that  the theory's assumptions (even if they initially seem unrealistic) capture something that is essential to explaining what it is that the theory is trying to explain.
D) if the theory's predictions are consistently accurate, then the theory is definitely valid.