Maybe you could call this the argument from contradiction. My argument stems from the observation that on any significant topic people hold a great variety of opinions. Many of these held opinions contradict many other held opinions. Now, they can’t all be right. It’s possible that no opinion is right, at least in whole, and maybe not even in part.
Given the huge number of people and the huge number of differing opinions, it follows that most opinions cannot be true due to the various and contradictory views.
That there is some individual who only believes correct things is so unlikely that we can dismiss it; the chance that this is the case is vanishingly small. There are no omniscient people. There are probably no omniscient beings. I not sure what it would mean to be omniscient, but in any case contradictions abound.
There are far more ways of being wrong than being right and no one has a good grasp on the truth of significant issues.
“In logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e. g. the two propositions “A is B” and “A is not B” are mutually exclusive. Formally this is expressed as the tautology ¬(p ∧ ¬p).” – Taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontradiction