Your use of the word "very" is a giveaway that you're being snarky.

I am definitely suspicious of scientists who act as the truth authority, and cast aspersions on lay people who don't understand their proofs. That attitude is antithetical to the spirit of science, which encourages skepticism and the democratization of thought.

Science is about reaching an expert consensus of the most probably explanation of the available evidence. It is not a democratization of thought - it is evidence that matters not majority opinion or vote of scientists.

More generally, it takes a lifetime of study to truly understand even a small aspect of physics. How can you expect someone to explain a lifetime of study in an article for lay people without glossing over the details? I trust the opinions of one physics professor about quantum mechanics much more than 1 million lay people.

I respectfully disagree: consensus is not an important building block of the scientific method.

Also: it is generally held that someone who has completed a PhD in physics is an expert in their small aspect of physics, and that they understand well a broader aspect of physics. Getting a PhD takes a lot less than a lifetime (fortunately).