My opinion sits between the two sides of the argument, I am not sure why people get so wound up about it rather than seeing each perspective.
Someone's physique does not influence what they know in any way, shape or form. It would be like refusing to get advice from Zatsiosky, Bompa, Fleck or Kraemer based solely on whether they have abs or not. If Simmons retired from lifting to a couch potato I would still be confident he could get my deadlift up, regardless of his aesthetics or current strength level.
On the other hand I do prefer if someone is good in their own field rather than being advice based only. For example if two people studied powerlifting and were equal in qualification but one of them can squat 800lbs and the other doesn't train I would go with the person who has practical experience as well as educational experience. This is my choice because I think some things are learned best by doing and lessons learned in the real world can differ from lessons learned by education alone.
From an anecdotal perspective I suffered from a serious illness and lost approximately 50lbs of lean tissue in the space of a few weeks. I was so weak that I could barely walk up the stairs on my own and used to have to get assistance standing up from a seated position. This in no way influenced my programme design capabilities so if you judged me on appearance alone nobody would have hired me (hypothetically as I was unable to work one-to-one anyway).
I personally think disregarding someone based solely on their aesthetics is flawed judgement. I think that aesthetics can also be important if that person's niche is getting people into great shape.
