No, you're not the only ignorant person in denial of all the data. ALL of the scientific studies and analyses show a significant effect. Show me one, just one, legit study that disagrees. All that you denialists have are anecdotes. We are well past the point where any reasonable person can continue to deny the data.
I have ZERO respect for anyone who says, "These shoes are no better than any other shoes because correlation/placebo/whatever/etc." Even if we all agreed that the current studies are not 100% conclusive, that's only at most an argument for agnosticism--at most. That's not an argument for the opposite conclusion. It's only an argument in favor of agnosticism. Show me one, just one, reasonable person who's saying "placebo/correlation/whatever/etc." and then advocating for agnosticism. Not one person is doing that. Every single person who says "placebo/correlation/whatever/etc." insists that the VFs are no better than any other shoe.
I could respect someone who says, "I don't think the studies and data we have so far are conclusive enough to convince me, so I don't know if the shoes offer an advantage." That would be an actual somewhat reasonable opinion to hold. But saying, "The studies/data aren't conclusive enough for me, therefore I'm going to assert that the opposite is true based on an anecdote," is just blatant insanity.
If all of the evidence points in one direction, but you continue to insist on the opposite conclusion just because it can't be proven 100%, then you are insane. If you're placing a bet on something that has a 99% chance of happening, do you bet against it just because the odds aren't 100%? That is patently insane. The evidence may not (and probably never can) prove 100% that the VFs provide a significant advantage, but the evidence we do have is definitely well above 50% at this point. The only reasonable bet at this point is to admit that the VFs most likely do provide a significant advantage.