"Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257
"...Dr. Magueijo said. "We need to drop a postulate, perhaps the constancy of the speed of light."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/31/science/e-and-mc2-equality-it-seems-is-relative.html
Joao Magueijo, Niayesh Afshordi, Stephon Alexander: "So we have broken fundamentally this Lorentz invariance which equates space and time...It is the other postulate of relativity, that of constancy of c, that has to give way."

*View: https://youtu.be/kbHBBtsrU1g?t=1431*
"You want to go back to a notion of space-time that preceded the 20th century, and it wants to ignore the essential lessons about space-time that the 20th century has taught us." Joao Magueijo: "Yes, that's right. So it's nouveau-Newtonian."

https://pirsa.org/16060116?t=3211
"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92

https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768
Physicists know that the speed of light is variable as per Newton, try to tell the truth sometimes, but then stop halfway and restart singing "Divine Einstein":

Modern physics is predicated on Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light falsehood and would collapse without it. In this regard, telling the truth is suicidal:

"He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels."

http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html
"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light," Joao Magueijo, a cosmologist at Imperial College London and pioneer of the theory of variable light speed, told Motherboard. "So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much."

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8q87gk/light-speed-slowed