Thoughts on expertise

Often times we hear or read about something that appeals to the expert for validation.  A subject is presented and then supported by the expert.  Or an expert speaks, presenting a new or novel idea, and his thoughts are embraced simply because he is an expert.
In some circles, it is nearly anathema to not listen to the expert.  "Don't question, just listen," seems to be the unwritten mantra.
Now I can appreciate the value of expertise and the wisdom that is typically included in expertise, but one cannot and must not mindlessly follow any human direction or advice.  We see an example of this in the science world.  The standard practice in science and medicine is peer review and documentation.  The scientist must "prove" his work and must document it to the point that it can be reproduced by a third party. His work must also be released for review and criticism, i.e., peer review journals.
A third thought is in regards to our circles of influence.  We tend to more quickly believe the thoughts and ideas of those from our own circles and distrust those from without.  This is probably a natural response, but a slightly dangerous one.  Because all men are fallible, including the pope, everything must be tested and checked.  Personally, I believe there's are three checkpoints to consider: Scripture, tradition and logic.  That is, the Bible, as given to us by the church, tradition, as in that which has always been taught and believed by the historic church and logic, as given to us by God.  This is not to say that everything must be logical, but that nothing can be illogical.
The main point here is this, consider the source, critique it against a known standard and pray for wisdom.