Engines can consistently beat human players, that's true, but they each play incredibly different styles of game that makes such a statement just a little too simplistic. There are parts of the game that humans easily outperform engines in, and as a result, blindly trusting an engine's assessment as to the validity of human moves is problematic to sy the least. Where engine's make it up is in pure calculation.
Consider this: if it was as simple as Yereslov suggests, then a centaur (human assisted engine) would be no better than an engine alone. Centaurs, however, can consistently outplay even today's top engines.
Engines are superior to human players. It's very simple.
To keep claiming otherwise is just as escape from reality.
Engines cannot make humans, humans can make engines. It's human intelligence that makes engines work. It was created to work for our benefit not the other way around. I bet that the one who created your engine know the flaws of it's system. So who is better, the engine or the creator? Well then that is the reality.