That's perfectly fine. In fact, it would probably have too much overhead to try to build a dynamic/strong runtime on top of javascript, so adopting the platform

That's perfectly fine. In fact, it would probably have too much overhead to try to build a dynamic/strong runtime on top of javascript, so adopting the platform's type discipline was probably a wise choice. However, the type discipline is a fundamental aspect of the definition of a programming language, and you can't exactly call it the same language if it has a completely different type discipline on different platforms. And it would be nice if clojure advocates stopped lying to people about how it is the same language. Be transparent about how different it really is, even if it looks the same on the surface.