I agree with your points here. Just wanted to clarify "recognized by all" was meaning "all of those in the conversation/debate", since as you indicated a general "all" would have group bias. Since those looking at a paper may not all recognize certain authorities, there can be some challenges there.

In general I find debating a paper or specific evidence to be rather exhausting just for those reasons, and much prefer debating a specific person on their viewpoint. Even if I do not convince them on a subject, they can pose direct challenges where they do not recognize figures that I do, and the reverse. A perfect example is in political debate where people quote Fox news and CNN to each other, neither recognizing that they have both committed the appeal to authority fallacy.