" if our current understanding holds, then... "
Boy, you sure don't think like a scientist! It's very hard to explain you some very simple things. But please don't take that as an offence, you should know better than most people that I place little value in "thinking like a scientist". It's just that, to use a metaphor, the fact that I don't attach particular significance to chess doesn't mean I think chess players should be free to violate the rules of chess. What you don't understand is that, figuratively speaking, you are trying to move a bishop sideways, I'm telling you you just can't do that, and you're arguing with me that nothing prevents you from doing it. You think you are right, I think you are missing the point.
Look at your assertion above: "if our current understanding holds". Well, the whole problem is that the only reason you want to visit a planet 94 light-years away is because you believe our current understanding holds! The same knowledge that tells you there's a planet so far away in space also tells you you can't possibly get there. You can't accept one and deny the other just because it makes you feel warm and fuzzy. Sure, maybe it's possible to travel faster than light (a completely paradoxical concept but, hey, I'm only a primitive species of hominid), only you fail to realize that such a "discovery" means the end of astronomy as primitive species of hominids have conceived it. No more relativity, no more planets 94 light-years away. It's as simple as that.