Looks like you guys scared off korps
I've read the arguments on lift go back and forth over the years but I found the manuscript of (sorry I can't quote exact references) One engineer arguing with NASA or terms and the inaccurate models that are still out there that mislead how lift occurs. The explanation given is that the aircraft/body etc itself has to be seen as the object that the force is being exerted on. The resultant force comes from the change in the momentum of the fluid or air (insert your various airfoils for desired effect) that results in creating a greater amount of accumulated perpendicular force on one side of the body than the other resulting in what is termed lift. The dynamics of what is happening in the fluid on the top side is secondary in regards to, changing air velocities, pressure, drag etc.

So to Korps the airfoil that creates lift, and look up Wikipedia definition in the link provided earlier as it is from Nasa's rewrite of the definition, is changing the momentum of air to exert a greater force on the body or airfoil on one side more than the other by how it changes the momentum of the fluid or air on one side over the other.
And oversimplifying... the top side of the fiol changes the momentum of the fluid to not act on the body perpendicularly as much but since the air on top and botttom have the same mass the air on top instead exerts it force in the way of drag which is more so a horizontal force which is overcome by the forward thrust of the aircraft. So the top side air doesn't get a chance to cancel the bottom side perpendicular force.

I'm in the middle of gluing a plane together but I couldn't resist throwing in a simplified explanation at the risk of being attacked for it. Oh well....