I think English isn't the author's first language:
The authors of the OPERA paper [5] seem to include a correction for the Lorentz transformations,
but they not correct for the change in scenario. And because they project back the time of
provided by the moving clock to the baseline they seem to incorrectly assume that the outcome of
their experiment should be equivalent to that using a clock in the baseline reference system
This comment will probably never be read, but nevertheless ...
I am a Frenchman living in the Netherlands. And you are both correct and incorrect ...
The Dutch are probably among the most fluent non-native English speakers in Europe, BUT, they speak for most of them a "good enough" English, and not at all a perfect English.
This usually materializes even more when they are writing.
There is even several books (usually written by Dutch authors themselves) making fun of "dutchisms".
That said, I don't necessarily consider myself better ... Simply, I do other kind of mistakes, so their mistakes usually strike me more than my own mistakes of course, but mistakes of other French speakers as well
While most of the Dutch people I've heard speak did so with perfectly fluent English (and American accents -- thank you, Hollywood), you're unwittingly assuming he's relatively young -- my understanding is that, not surprisingly, levels of English fluency drop off somewhat rapidly with age in the current Dutch population.
The authors of the OPERA paper [5] seem to include a correction for the Lorentz transformations, but they not correct for the change in scenario. And because they project back the time of provided by the moving clock to the baseline they seem to incorrectly assume that the outcome of their experiment should be equivalent to that using a clock in the baseline reference system