I think the bit I'm really objecting to in the thing I (badly) described is the assumption that because A hasn't experienced (or genuinely thought or believed) the thing under discussion, B's claim to have experienced (or genuinely thought or believed) it must be false. It's ... it's arguing from your own experience to dismiss someone else's experience, which feels like rather insidious double standards. Or some kind of metaphysical autism.

Evangelicals of both stripes* do this, definitely. "You claim to have (never) experienced God, I have (never) done so, therefore you're deluded." Delete where applicable, PLEASE, DELETE DELETE DELETE.

* "badger evangelist"