It isn't a fallacy in the sense that it's useless. Appeal to authority and the closely-related ad hominem are useful arguments in practice, something like a heu

It isn't a fallacy in the sense that it's useless. Appeal to authority and the closely-related ad hominem are useful arguments in practice, something like a heuristic. It's true that an expert is more likely to give correct information than a non-expert, though it's not sufficient to prove or disprove the claims of either. In practice, you don't have time to give every claim from any source the same level of treatment, so you're probably going to "appeal to authority" when deciding whether to listen to your doctor or your aunt that's into woo. Anyone can critique a paper but it is most definitely not the case that every critique carries the same impact. Peer review isn't done by randos for a reason.