I thought of that but what he said is so far from situation on that front, I dismissed it. It is not that there is a conflict but rather than the two don’t naturally and easily fit together in a single picture or equation for things. But this is hardly impossible because it has been done in the extention of Kaluza-Klien to supergravity and then as a formulation of string theory. We cannot get supersymmetry and string theory to work but it does show it is possible for the general relativity and quantum physics to be combined.
A better explanation for the comment might be a poor understanding of entanglement… however… (from Wikipedia)
In 1935; Einstein, Rosen, Podolsky published a paper concerning quantum entanglement of particles, questioning quantum nonlocality and the apparent violation of causality upheld in SR: particles can appear to interact instantaneously at arbitrary distances. This was a misconception since information is not and cannot be transferred in the entangled states; rather the information transmission is in the process of measurement by two observers (one observer has to send a signal to the other, which cannot exceed c). QM does not violate SR.
But just to show how much relativity is a part of quantum field theory, it is by incorporating relativity into quantum mechanics which produced the division of the wave equation into the one for bosons and the one for fermions – pretty fundamental. That is why the comment seemed a bit outrageous to me.