This feels like a logical fallacy of some kind, though I don't know the name if it exists... Maybe an appeal to the ignorant or something.
It seems to me the only useful definition of AGI is something like "energy in = progress" with no other human input required. The
One way to answer the question of whether we've achieved AGI is to ask what people in 1980 would have said if you showed them current models. We're standing on the finish line, so we're uncertain. But anyone in 1980 would have said yes.
