Nature and other peer-review journals would send letters like this:
Dear Dr. Einstein:
Thank you for your submission. However, as you well know, the scientific consensus maintains that light propagates through the medium of luminiferous aether. These real-world measurements of sunlight are irrelevant; when the data is entered into the computer programs which we wrote, predicated on the existence of luminiferous aether, the resulting simulations clearly support the existence of luminiferous aether. Please do not send any more articles of such irresponsible pseudo-science.
The lack of publication in peer-reviewed journals would be used to attack relativity theory, instead of questioning the journals.
Instead of championing relativity, Arthur Eddington would have published a handy graphic using statistical obfuscation to “hide the deflection”.
The “luminiferous aether” would be renamed “light movement theory”, and supporters of relativity would be derided as “light movement deniers”.
Meanwhile, the science of optics would be re-named “looky-science” as a gesture of magnanimity from the Benevolent Masters to the Great Unwashed.