This description in itself (from the above link) should give one pause:
"I am often asked why my definitions of Biblical Hebrew words differ from all other resources available such as Strong's dictionary and why my translations of the Bible are unlike any other English translation. Most people believe that an English translation of the Bible is a fairly good representation of the original Hebrew text. But, have you ever heard the expression "lost in the translation?" Through my research I have found that the original meanings of Hebrew words are not only lost to us in the translations but have long been buried and hidden from our sight. I believe it is time that we read the Hebrew Bible from the perspective of its original authors rather than from our own modern perspective.
I am also frequently asked for my "credentials" to teach Hebrew. Well, I guess I don't have any unless you count the thousands of hours I have spent in research and study. I have attempted to use as many resources as I could from the fields of history, linguistics, archeology, anthropology and theology in order to uncover the original Hebrew alphabet, language, thought and culture."
The video linked in an earlier post is just as troubling, if not more so.
You have highlighted one of the problems with this resource, in my opinion. It regularly commits the root fallacy when dealing with the meaning of words. The reason most lexical resources don't give such information as you have just cited is simply because it is irrelevant to the meaning of the word as it was used in the Bible, and it would be entirely misleading to try to read anything into the meaning of the word based on such supposed etymology.