I found an interesting paper. What do you think? An Alternative Hypothesis for Special Relativity Horst Eckardt An alternative theory being analogous to Einstein’s special theory of relativity is presented. While Einstein based his theory on the relativity principle of motion and constancy of the velocity of light, this theory assumes an absolute frame of reference and a general length contraction. Both concepts are taken from general relativity and applied to an asymptotically flat space. This results in a transformation group being different from the Lorentz transformation and a Eucledian addition theorem of velocities. The results are in accordance with experiments and long known discrepancies between special relativity and experimental findings are resolved as well as paradoxa being introduced by Einstein’s original theory. Physical facts being unintelligible before can be interpreted in the light of the alternative theory. (Sorry I do not have 15 fu..ing post for link.) ptep-online.com/index_files/2009/PP-17-11.PDF
We do have an alternative theory section you know. As to the merit of the hypothesis, I'll let more renowned people comment on that, although after briefly reading, I was not happy with a couple of false assumptions.
The "Absolute frame of reference" this theory uses would require justification, explanation, or even a single example that agrees with experiment. As far as I can tell, it does none of these things.
This PDF you referenced states within the first couple paragraphs: "This view is corroborated by newer advanced theories like Einstein-Cartan-Evans theory" Ironically enough or not so ironically actually, Horst Eckardt is associated with Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies (AIAS) which was specifically established by Evans to promote his Einstein-Cartan-Evans theory. So what exactly is the Einstein-Cartan-Evans theory? Here is a link From the link: Evans' central claims were later shown to be mathematically incorrect[5][6][7][8] and, in 2008, the editor of Foundations of Physics published an editorial note effectively retracting the journal's support for the hypothesis.[9] So what we have here is essentially 'a swing and a miss'. Evans refuses to accept it and it appears that he will squander the rest of his career. Too bad.