Would love to join, aiming for 170+

Can someone please read my line of reasoning and tell me if it's still incorrect?

For Chin, Public opinion is no real indication of the existence of extra sensory perception because chin believes that the public opinion is kind of controlled by the popular media reports which favor skeptics does because skeptics are favored, even if extra sensory perception were true the general public is being given biased information by the news reports that favor the skeptics not believing in it. For Waller, he does believe that if extra sensory perception were true that it would be able to convince the general public very clearly by just proving it like mind reading where a person could be like oh tell me what you think and the mind reader could say say and show to be true for the general public.

B is incorrect because it states that could be demonstrated to the satisfaction of all skeptics, while Waller does not state that. Waller states that it would be generally accepted by the public, not can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of all skeptics.

I'm kind of confused why B isn't correct for Melly (merely consistent with) since Melly says that "we must do what we can to ensure the survival of the big horn even if it means limiting the population of mountain lion" and B is saying "the preservation of a species as a whole is more important than the loss of a few individuals". wouldn't this be consistent with what Melli is saying meaning that the preservation of a species meaning big horn as a whole is more important than the loss of a few individuals meaning the loss of a few mountain lion by regulating the population of it?