I think we are having two distinct discussions. I refer again to the paper linked by Peter Kent. The authors refer to a 'Real Life' wing......
I can summarize in this way. A cambered airfoil produces lift at 0 degrees Angle of attack, AoA as centerline through chord LE/TE.
Remove this definition from the argument. Can a symmetric airfoil produce Lift?
Of course yes. So camber is not a critical precursor of Lift? Of course not.
So if camber is not a requirement, how is it included in the basic description?
These two fellas propose a simple way to understand lift. One that does not require suspension of 'aspects' of gases, and motion.