I was right.

You seem confused.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/credentialism

"belief in or reliance on academic or other formal qualifications as the best measure of a person's intelligence or ability to do a particular job."

It's also accepting a weak argument because of the credentials of the author. I thought that was trivially understood, but I guess not.

Which is also not what you're doing; your case appears to be that credentials are a reason to reject a sound explanation or argument, which is absurd.

Now you are bringing in your own narrative to a dictionary definition. My case is that the parent comment seems to put credentials before a valid argument, which is what I am against. Credentials are not a proxy for a sound argument.

Dictionaries aren't weapons.

Dictionaries are references to look up words before opening mouths.