I think they've done an excellent job of defining the terms they are using and explaining the practicalities of administering the challenge.
Indeed, the passage you quote demonstrates a great deal of compassion in the calm, careful way it explains the answers it is giving, and in the way that it does not give advice without also explaining the rationale that informs that advice. (That is *huge* in my book.) Indeed, that's part of what makes it funny -- part of what makes most FAQs funny -- the writing style that results from assuming complete ignorance on the part of the reader, yet remaining inoffensive, because the goal is to enlighten. A well-written FAQ is good Aikido, as it harmonizes with the reader even as it cleverly redirects their energy.
I saw the phrase "defies scientific description" in one of the listed claims, and for a moment I read it as "deifies scientific description".
cross-posted from another thread (with minor edits)