That implies that the AA filter has some kind of intelligence behind it. It's not making up a transition between pixels, it's just dispersing the light less accurately.
Sensors with and without AA filters may technically have the same pixel count but the usable resolution you get out of them is different. Just like how putting a less sharp lens on the same body gives you less effective resolution. The pixel count may not change but how much perceivable detail there is absolutely does.
If we were talking about a lens, nobody would claim a softer lens is somehow capable of giving the same detail. If Canon made a lens with a special blurring element inside, everyone would call them crazy. But put a special blurring layer on a sensor and you want to say it's not just the same resolving power, but actually better?
Look, if you like AA filters, okay, cool, good for you I guess. We've had AA filters on cameras for years now and it's not stopped nice images being made. It's certainly good for lower resolutions and video. I wouldn't want to try to film 1080p video without an AA filter. But we're talking about 36mp, 42mp, even 50mp still images. I understand peoples' reluctance to move on in technology but I don't understand, like I literally don't see how it adds up, this idea that an AA filter is better.
AA filters were made as a band-aid to fix a problem. Resolution of digital sensors was too low to produce nice smooth gradients and it got confused by some really fine patterns. So we got weird pixelated curves and false colours. The crude solution to that was to just blur the whole sensor. Now we have sensors with high enough resolution to reproduce those gradients and fine details accurately. More accurately than film was ever able to do and we never had AA filters on film. The problem AA filters were invented to fix is no longer a problem.
I get that there are uses for sensors with AA filters. Like I said in a previous comment, I'm sure the 6D and 90D models will keep AA filters and the 1D, 5D and 7D will adopt them slowly. It's not going to be a total switch overnight. People will continue to have a choice for at least the next what, six years maybe? Maybe ten? But you can't tell me that AA filters are somehow better and more "honest" than a non-filtered sensor. I doubt you would claim that a sharp lens is more "dishonest" than a soft one.