The most popular use of experts is medical. People go to doctors because they know more about sickness and injury than the common joe\jane.
When oil companies want to find oil, they go to experts in the field of geology, and when people are in trouble with the law (or have a dispute with other people) they turn to lawyers.
Reasonable people accept that there are experts in these various fields that actually do know more than they do about the specifics in question.
Smart people also know that getting a second opinion can be as valuable as getting the first one, and when the first two do not agree go for a third.
BUT
This is different from the people that reject the opinions of various fields of experts out of hand as some kind of smoke and mirrors. This kind of wholesale rejection can come from no other source than being totally incompetent to understand the field.
Whether it is due to ignorance, stupidity, insanity, maliciousness or delusion, is not that important to the fact that if one doesn't have the tools to evaluate the validity of the experts opinion, know where one's knowledge is incomplete nor able to see that the expert does have the {information\knowledge\education} in the matter, then one just cannot see the validity of the experts opinion.
We are not talking about blindly accepting the opinion of the {authority\expert}, but the wholesale rejection of a whole field of {educated\trained\experienced\tested} experts.
The {argument from authority} is a logical fallacy because the implication is that the authority must be right, and this is false. What is true is that the authority is likely to be right, but the {afa} has no way to determine if that is true in the specific case where the argument is employed.
Enjoy
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.