Here's an addition to my previous post.

Setterfield claims the following concerning absolute time. (LR is his
shorthand for Lorentz Relativity and SR for Einstein's Special
Relativity.) I think the excerpt is enough to give others a sense of
where Setterfield is going with this, and whether it holds water. But
I've given the link to the page for anyone interested in reading more.

Thanks again,
Shepherdmoon

---
There is a further difference between SR and LR. Einstein proposed that
the mathematical transformations that had to be performed applied to
time, space, and mass. By contrast, LR says that such transformations
only apply to clocks, meter sticks and momentum. There is an important
distinction. For example, SR requires time itself to be affected by
velocity or gravitational potential. By contrast, in LR nothing ever
happens to time itself, just to certain types of clock attempting to
keep time. In a somewhat similar way, an increase in temperature may
lengthen the pendulum of some clocks and affect their time-keeping, but
not the actual time itself. LR thus accepts that other types of clock
exist for measuring time that may be unaffected by speed or potential.
By contrast SR requires that time itself is actually affected by
velocity or potential, and the same applies to mass and length. As a
consequence of the fact that time itself is not affected by velocity or
potential, LR recognizes that a universal time exists that is
applicable to all frames of reference. In addition LR holds to the
concept of an actual instant of "now" that applies throughout the
cosmos.
---
http://www.setterfield.org/tworelativities.html