The contrast between nanoseconds and "milliseconds" makes me wonder if NorthernBoy meant microseconds, the next SI step up from nanoseconds. Light only travels about 1 foot in 1 nanosecond, so microseconds would be a better choice at the scale of thousands of feet.

But the favored SI prefix aside...I'd like to see some of the reasoning by which that conclusion is drawn from that starting point. It seems a non sequitur...or worse, deliberate misinterpretation of language. No, simultaneity doesn't hold exactly over small distances...so what? I see some statements of the obvious, some nitpicking at irrelevancies, and a statement of victory without any logical connection to the rest of the argument. RussT, where, exactly, do you show that SR is falsified?