I think the definite false part is 'ruby is a[n acceptable] Lisp' - which is false. One could have a language with a ruby like syntax and co-routines and be a L

I think the definite false part is 'ruby is a[n acceptable] Lisp' - which is false. One could have a language with a ruby like syntax and co-routines and be a Lisp. One could probably argue that Perl6 is a Lisp with CFGs a first order language primitive (which is in essence what macros allow), c.f. Greenspun's Tenth.