This seems like just a complete misunderstanding of scepticism. And of thought. It's an absurd extreme and they try to claim that any movement towards scepticis

This seems like just a complete misunderstanding of scepticism. And of thought. It's an absurd extreme and they try to claim that any movement towards scepticism must land at that extreme or it's "faith-based". I looked up the quote and it's from G.K. Chesterton, a Christian apologist. Also the man for which the fence was named. But that's beside the point. It totally tracks that an apologist would want to cast aspersions on scepticism in general. In a way, it's a tacit admission that religious thought is not rational and can never be defended on the basis of rationality or logic. So they stop trying and start trying to make the claim that rationality and logic just don't exist. That even acceptance of reality requires irrational faith. The idea is that once you accept that premise, you have to accept the premise of a deity also based on irrational faith. But we can demonstrate that there is a shared reality that is not capable of being "thought" away. You can take any relatively sharp object and stab it through their hand. Now, if reality were subjective and based on irrational faith, he could trust in his faith to make his hand not stabbed. But we both know that's not going to happen, what's going to happen is that he's going to hurt. Solipsism is all fun and games until someone loses an eye.