Well we've detected neutrinos and they matched up to what we'd postulated pretty well, I'm assuming you meant the neutralinos, the leading WIMP candidate. Keep in mind that neutrinos and quarks hadn't been detected when either of us were born, and the original theory is from the 60s, the main guy who formulated it, Gell-Mann, is still alive and kicking, so its not like hypothetical particle candidates haven't been regularly proposed and disposed or proven in recent decades. Black holes have been posited as early as the 1780's, Laplace actually did some work on those, extrasolar planets have been suggested for a long time too, both weren't pinned down until pretty recently either. Takes time.

Anyway, I'm not sure who is saying "well, that's dark matter irrefutably proven then" but let me point out that Dark Matter, while usually in modern context referring to the exotic stuff, still just means anything we can't see yet, and I'd definitely say the consensus is that most matter is dark, what the hell that dark matter is composed of is still heavily debated, but the more mundane alternatives have ever-increasing evidence against them as the lead candidate. I'm not sure how versed you on that evidence, we can discuss it but you'd kinda have to be specific on what your suggesting. I take it though that you're already familiar with the major bits of evidence like the Bullet and Trainwreck clusters, is there anything in particular about those you dispute?