OK we are not remarkable in any way. But we should not be so pigheaded to think we are ahead of every other civilisation in the universe, if in fact any other intelligent civilisation exists.
On the one hand you are agreeing "we are not remarkable", and then on the other hand you are saying "we are the only ones".
You can't have your cake if you're going to eat it.
Either we are (I would posit) infinitely remarkable if we are "the only ones" given the vastness of just our galaxy, let alone the entire observable universe.
Or we are not very remarkable, and thereby others must exist and we just haven't run into each other yet, which is not unlikely, given again the inconceivable vastness of the universe.
In the Milky Way galaxy alone, there are thought to be perhaps 10 Billion earth sized planets in their star's respective habitable zone, that's billion, with a B. Now how many galaxies are there... 100, 200 billion. Let's just say that we are way off on our numbers of habitable planets, let's say it's 1 habitable planet per galaxy and not the 10 billion that findings from missions such as Kepler seem to extrapolate towards (hey it's only a factor a billion), that's still 100 or 200 billion habitable planets in the universe.
The numbers here are just so large as to be inconceivable.
So which is more pigheaded, to claim that Earth is the only planet from 100 or 200 billion to have intelligent life on it, or to claim that it seems rather unlikely that would be the case and we probably just haven't run into anybody else yet because space is big, really, really, big.