Is relativity absolute truth?

When I was a student at junior high, I got fascinated with relativity. Lorentz transformation, time dilation, length contraction, all magic stuff. But soon one encounters twin paradox. While authorities asserted that the paradox is resolved, I, like many others, was not fully convinced. However, I did not pursue the question further.

Now I am at the twilight of my life. I want to pick up some questions left behind from my impressionable youth. I look at the problem further. I think the logical inconsistency from Lorentz transformation is intrinsic. I made a new proposal on the movement of light.

Special relativity was developed more than one hundred years ago. It is one of the grandest pieces in physics. How can it be wrong? It seems unlikely. But …

I submitted the paper to a journal. It was rejected, as expected. The following are the comments from the referee.

Comments:
1.The abstract suggests this paper is based on one or more serious misunderstandings about its subject matter.  No "logical inconsistency" exists in the Lorentz transformation and special relativity, and so-called paradoxes such as the twin paradox are very well understood by specialists (albeit often poorly explained in newspapers and other popular literature).  Moreover, following the intense interest in violations of Lorentz symmetry in recent years, special relativity has been experimentally verified to an extraordinary degree of precision, in some sectors to parts in 10^{30} or better.  To be credible, any alternative proposal must address this large body of experimental evidence as a priority, which the abstract states is not done in this work.

2.As is clearly well discussed in the related literature, Galilean transformation cannot figure out the actual findings of the Michelson-Morley experiment. It violates the rules of the special relativity. In a such transformation, the speed of light is always relative to the motion and reference points leading that it will be varying in different direction, which is not physically acceptable as the speed of light is/should be constant (in vacuum) in all scenarios. Therefore Galilean transformations are not relevant in the realms of special relativity.

I am going to respond to comment 1 first. The referee claimed that “so-called paradoxes such as the twin paradox are very well understood by specialists (albeit often poorly explained in newspapers and other popular literature)”. Explanations are usually given by specialists, whether in professional literature or popular literature. If the problems are well understood by specialists, why they give poor explanations, in popular literature, as well as in professional literature?

On comment 2, the referee stated that, “Galilean transformation cannot figure out the actual findings of the Michelson-Morley experiment. It violates the rules of the special relativity.” In this statement, the referee already treats the special relativity as the absolute truth. Anything different from the special relativity is automatically wrong.

The paper

A new understanding about the speed of light

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378738958_A_new_understanding_about_the_speed_of_light