So more than a fifth of the lisp entries are in the bottom twentyfifth of the competition. So you could also use the contest results to argue that lisp is five times worse for AI than the average language.
(Or, rather, that language alone doesn't guarantee success, but that would be too rational and boring for an online forum).
For that to be true, more than a quarter would have to be in the bottom 25th percentile. (In fact, it still points to lisp being better than average).
Anyway,
The bottom 25th percentile of the competition is relegated to submissions that didn't run.
There was a bug (still is, I believe) in the lisp 'starter pack,' which caused the client to crash (It sent garbage to the server or something). So even the default Java starter submission would beat it.
Given the number of people who submitted once and walked away, I wouldn't read too much into it anyway.
You'd have to be an idiot to argue that language alone guarantees success. A more common bad argument is say that because this is idiotic it follows that language is irrelevant. That's actually a popular position nowadays.
Just because computers obey the law of excluded middle does not mean we should.
