What was the tire limitation speed on that "airplane"? (once again, note very generous use of term airplane...)
Again, it's ALL in the wording of the orginal theorem: There are two major possible interpretations. First, can the airplane fly if it's relative motion is zero? This is usually what is strongly implied, though not stated, as the criteria for this debate. That is, if the airplane isn't moving forward through the realtive wind, would there be any of the conditions necessary for flight? (Even NASA concludes that flight is a combination of Bernoulli and Newton.) Clearly, no.
The second option, the one actually tested, refers to what would happen if the friction of the wheels and bearings of the "airplane's" landing gear were negligible. Negligible, as in the thrust or power of the airplane was able to overcome that friction and move the airplane forward through the relative wind. For all practical purposes, the Mythbusters guys -two very obvious 40+ year old virgins- did exactly that. The tires of the airplane, which reduced the friction of the object relative to the ground, allowed the power of mighty Rotax engine to propel the "airplane" forward through the relative wind, therefore producing lift around the various airfoils of the "airplane". (Also, I tend to think that the volume of air being moved aft of the "airplane" over the airfoils of the airplane by the propeller also contributed to the flight. [NOTE: Real airplanes have propellers.])
For a counterpoint to the opinion that the landing gear is irrelevant, remove the landing gear from the airplane and firmly attach it to a trailer/sled/moving object that happened to be moving in the opposite direction of the powerplants of the airplane. (You know, similar to the scene where Maverick is riding the motorcycle shaking his fist at the F-14, yet immediatetly before he slams into the approach lights for the opposite runway...) Spin the Rotax, or CF-34x or PW-127, for that matter, and see what happens. I think what would happen would be loud, colorful, and very expensive, but I doubt you would be able to call it flight.
This entire subject boils down to how the question is worded.