Right Divider
Body part
You did not "argue for an idea" at all. If you'd like to, by all means DO!Nope. Whenever you argue for an idea while naming as your source an authentic expert in that domain, who also claims what you are claiming, and that expert teaches what is uniformly taught by all the other authentic experts in that domain, that is a valid appeal to authority.
Do you not understand why "dark matter" and "dark energy" were invented? To prop up a FAILED theory (i.e., the "big bang").
"Dark matter" and "dark energy" have never been observed and are only "believed" to exist as a band-aid for the BB. Instead of throwing out the failed theory, the secular (i.e., atheist) scientists just keep putting patches on it.
Again, science is NOT about credentials or "consensus"... it's about FACTS. It does not matter even one tiny bit how many experts agree on something (that is another fallacy called the appeal to popularity) nor what their credentials are.The important thing to note, which makes this particular fallacy difficult to spot, is that the types of claims that you can establish through the valid appeal to authority is limited to what all of that domain's authentic experts uniformly agree upon, which means you're limited to establishing noncontroversial claims, you cannot validly appeal to authority when that domain's experts do not all agree among themselves about that claim.
Again!!! It does not matter if there is "uniformity" (i.e., consensus) in their FALSE belief system or not. That is THE appeal to popularity.Now, among PhD cosmologists, you would probably find uniformity in their teaching that the universe is "billions of years" old, but even though it would satisfy the condition for a valid appeal to authority to name one of them as a source for arguing that the universe is that old, it wouldn't prove your point, because, as @Trump Gurl above said, either the universe was made in six days or it wasn't, and the evidence doesn't demonstrate either one to the exclusion of the other, the evidence is consistent with both theories. If it is true that all PhD cosmologists agree that the universe is "billions of years" old, then they are all guilty of presuming that they are right, that the universe was not created in six days, which is the fallacy of begging the question.
And AGAIN, NO it does NOT make it a "valid appeal to authority". You are just immensely confused about what constitutes truth.
And AGAIN... you do NOT know what begging the question is.