If relativists could admit that what they support is merely a stand in for reality rather than reality itself, I would be OK with that. At that point, we are having a scientific discussion. But to claim such a logically inconsistent theory, detached from fundamental laws of physics, which has no real physical model for its primary actor of space / spacetime, is gospel truth, just makes you a religious zealot of the worst kind.
A theory in science is always considered provisional and not divinely inspired. It therefore has an expiration date. So their adherence to it necessarily means subscribing to a false religion. And perhaps this love of relativity is downstream from their love of moral relativity? Hey that's "his truth" man, hey that's just "his frame" if he wants to have a different accounting of "time" than you it's just as real as anything man. It even has a dash of "we can be as gods" going back in time and being outside of time itself. God being sovereign over all time and space thwarts that notion.
In Relativity, the entire universe conspires such that any beam of light you see only appears to have a certain speed. Even though there is no stationary reference frame that knows your velocity. Ok. But then space bends in one stationary spot. Hmmm. And space bending has no real physical meaning, but sounds cool. Nice. Great theory. Truly the most real description of physical reality yet \s.
a) IS implies a suggestion tempting ones consent into an artificial conflict (is vs isn't), while ignoring what WAS perceivable in nature.
Nature doesn't tell anyone within what it is...telling each other what something is implies the binding of free will of choice to one another, hence religion/religio - "to bind anew".
b) Relative/relate/relatus - "to carry back" implies motion (inception towards death) carrying back matter (life) aka all perceivable carrying forth and back each ones perception.
That's why it's all relative to each one within.
The issue...consenting to suggested relativism binds one to another, hence establishing an artificial relation in-between matter during the relation of matter within motion.
Matter holding onto matter ignores that motion separates matter from one another. Natural relation implies separation; artificial relation implies combination.
If/then implicates based on motion...admission and relativism reasons based on holding onto a side within a conflict (admit vs deny or relate vs conceal).
Implication implies natural; reason implies artificial.
Admission aka consent given to suggestion implies ones fictitious stand within perceivable reality. Nature forces adaption from being...admission vs denial among beings only distracts from nature.
One cannot be OK (all right)...only one within the right of all. Right/reg - "to move in a straight line"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/right
Suggested OK aka oll korrect implies all (oll) together (kor) moved in a straight line (rect)...hence tempting each consenting one into collectivization with others.
Inception sentences life towards point of death...suggesting points to one another tempts each other to ignore ones sentence/sentience.
Science/scio - "to know" implies the separation of all perceivable into each ones perception, while coming together to dis (apart) cuss (to shake) tempts each participant to ignore all perceivable for one another's suggestions.
...implies ones choice to hold onto a suggestion by another, while ignoring ones perception being moved apart from one another within all perceivable.
Pro (torwards) vision (sight) implies a division/divine of all perceivable moving towards each ones perception. It's the suggestions from one another viewed by ones perception as "provisional", which tempts one to willingly ignore "divine" division.
Perceivable Inspiration implies divine provision; suggested information implies unholy provision...both are provided towards ones vision, hence forcing ones free will of choice to adapt.
Certainty implies ones choice to ascertain a measurement by holding onto a suggested measure aka matter holding onto matter/measure, while ignoring motion.
Speed/spoed - "haste" implies matter (life) within motion (inception towards death) hurrying towards outcome, while ignoring origin, which inspires resistance (living) during temptation (dying).
Sleight of hand: "there's a bomb on a bus; if it goes above or below a certain speed, it explodes"...
Nonsense. No one is, "relativist," except in your head, and the heads of teachers embodying the old adage of not being able to do anything else. The theory of relativity is going many steps ahead of Newton, tying together good work done my many scientists (Einstein was in the right place at the right time - he didn't come up with it all, but did work out how many other efforts were connected).
From the very outset, Einstein noted problems with his theory, the gravitational constant being the one that made him lose sleep at night. Other things have been found, over time. As we more closely study space, and get a better handle on quantum mechanics (quantum computers are much less about computing than poking and prodding spacetime in a controlled way), more problems will be found, and suspicions confirmed or denied.
Relativity got us many technological advancements, and if civilization doesn't fully collapse, in the coming decades, we will exceed that understanding, and find new head scratchers to deal with.
To be clear, we have no fundamental laws of physics. Even conservation of energy has come into question, over the last many decades. We are far from knowing reality as it is, and anyone that thinks otherwise should not be paid much attention.