[troll mode on]

Sure, so much fixed that it hasn't accepted any change, not even changes by its own commission who recommended modifications to make it a better language. That better language was named Ido. But the Esperanto zealots rejected it. Read the Wikipedia page about it.

What I don't like in Esperanto, mainly:

• Its use of specially accented letters which are non standard (look at difficulties people have to post on /. in Esperanto!)
• Its over-use of negations. So much that many words only exist in their negatively-constructed form (good -> "bona", bad -> "mal-bona"). This is counter-intuitive, why would I think negatively for 50% of words?
• Not really used in any useful places

To summarize, Esperanto is a (successful, compared to Ido) fork of the main line which changed it name to Ido. [troll mode off]

Actually it's a real diff. geom. theorem (2nd-year math undergraduate stuff) which is indeed applicable to tokamaks, since ionized particles stay (up to diffusion) "stuck" in magnetic field lines.

The Wikipedia article is indeed accurate, although very terse.

-- and yes, I AM a plasma physicist (or at least, was one for 4 years)

You are revising your statement from pretending to know ALL(sic) that the Bible is good for, to observing that the Bible includes false terms. I would not have challenged your competence to make that revised statement.

Moreover, finding false terms in the Bible is straightforward and does not require anything as far fetched as saying that the weapon of the crime plays no role when determining guilt in a murder trial.