This. Well, the issue is the probability that it's just gaps. Ultimately, its the sort of thing that would only constitute a weak argument from authority iff the speaker had very very impressive accomplishments. Otherwise you're left assuming simplest explanation which doesn't involve presence of unarticulated points of any importance.

A gapless argument, like math proof, could trump authority if valid... an argument with gaps, on the other hand, is the one that is very prone to being trumped.