The recent activity on Bells theorem in PF has triggered my interest in the subject and I have added Bell to the list of things I might look at in greater detail. Unfortunately I cannot see the justification in one of the assumptions apparently made by Bell. As far as I understand it, Bell considered the assumptions made in the EPR paper and showed that these lead to predictions which are contradicted by the observations. So it seemed that there was something wrong with EPR. Fair enough. From this it was assumed that not just EPR but all theories of hidden variables are incorrect : NO PHYSICAL THEORY OF LOCAL HIDDEN VARIABLES CAN EVER REPRODUCE ALL OF THE PREDICTIONS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS. How can such a sweeping generalistion, which is based on EPR only, be made about all potential theories? If any theory is developed then to be a good theory it must conform to the observations. EPR failed but that doesn't mean that other theories will fail. What am I missing?