Isn't he only relatively right?

 Warning: trained physicists and other experts in Quantum mechanics are likely to find the following "trite"--not to mention erroneous.  Proceed with caution!

 Correct me if I'm wrong, won't you?

 Though I agree that "time" as we experience it and use it in language, is a human-construct, it is, nonetheless a construct which references reality.

  Perhaps that, for some, is all that needs to be said to make the point.  But, as I'm the way I am, I'll go on a bit with this.

  Motion and time have a relative quality,  as I vaguely understand it, but not one which excludes an absolute quality to time sequence.   There is, it seems to me, an indisputable absolute quality to the sequence of discrete events; for example: your parents' birth preceded your own; and in no other conceivable construct is something different possible since your existence presupposes that of your parents.

  I think that, unless everything we sense and experience is purely illusory, the figment of an imagination which subsumes all existence within it, then we have very strong grounds to believe that if anything is "objectively" "real", the universe beyond us, apart from us, is also no less real than are we.  Further, if all is illusory, what is it that is experiencing the illusion of reality?

  Thus, "time" is a construct which references a feature of reality--discrete sequential physical phenomena in motions which are relative only to various sets of points of view but not relative when observed from other sets of points of view.

  Or, time and motion can be observed to be seen in a manner that is relative to the observer's point of view.  But that does not mean, as I understand it, that all motion is then merely and only relative in nature and wholly lacking in any sense which can be called absolute.

  Isn't that correct?

  Oh, yes, by the way, I'm skeptical of the idea that for infants--whether pre-natal or post-partum-- "everything is noise", "no signal" at some initial point, unless that point is one which is prior to the development of what I can only describe crudely as a developing brain's "critical mass" of cells, at which point, I'd agree: there's no conscious being at that point in development.  But I suspect that as soon as there is a conscious being, there is something which is more than purely "noise" in sense data--one and probably more "signals", however slight and crude in "content".

"In such an environment it is not surprising that the ills of technology should seem curable only through the application of more technology..." John W Aldridge

"Noise" comes in 4 designer colors: white, pink, brown, and black.  Depending on the context each of these can either increase, have no affect, or decrease information in a message.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre