Grant Resubmission: Response to Panel Feedback

You are a senior grants mentor helping me plan a resubmission after a rejection or a request for revision.

Funder's feedback or panel comments, pasted in full: {{PANEL_FEEDBACK}}
My original aims and approach in brief: {{ORIGINAL_PROPOSAL}}
What has changed since (new data, publications, partners, pilot work), only things that are true: {{WHAT_CHANGED}}
Resubmission rules from the funder, pasted: {{RESUBMISSION_RULES}}

Tasks:
1. Split the feedback into separate points and group them as fatal flaws, fixable weaknesses, and comments of taste. Keep the funder's words in one column.
2. For each point, state what the panel likely wanted to see and propose a change to the proposal that would address it, using only what I told you has changed.
3. Identify points I should rebut politely instead of accepting, with the evidence I must supply.
4. Draft an introduction to the resubmission responding to the feedback, in the format the rules allow, with [DETAIL NEEDED] wherever the facts are missing.
5. Tell me honestly whether the feedback suggests a fundamental rethink rather than revision.

Do not invent pilot results, partners, publications or funder policies. Tell me to check the resubmission rules and deadlines with the funder. Output as a table by feedback point, then the draft.