Thank you for the suggestion. I should say this is the first thread I am starting since I joined physics forums four years ago. So this thread has branched from another one -"Photon entanglement and fair sampling assumption". I noted there that, on the one hand, so far no experiments demonstrating violations of the Bell inequalities have been free from some significant loopholes, such as the detection loophole and the locality loophole, on the other hand, the proof of the Bell theorem uses two mutually contradictory results/assumptions of quantum theory: unitary evolution and the projection postulate. Therefore, I argued, the Bell theorem is on a shaky ground both on the theoretical and on the experimental level. I was not taking sides with or against local realism, but pointed out that it has not been ruled out, however prevalent the opposite point of view can be. My posts followed in part those of nightlight, and I did not offer any original research (otherwise the posts would have been inappropriate for this forum). These issues were also discussed in some prevous threads (https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=245242 and https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=230461 ). My posts were criticized by knowledgeable opponents, but I'd say until recently their factual basis was not challenged. So I'll start with replying to DrChinese's posts I was not trying to say that the measurement problem is more or less important than, say, entanglement. All I was saying it is not some problem that arose yesterday, let alone was first raised by me. In this respect it is indeed "well-known" (Google gives 184000 links for the exact phrase "measurement problem in quantum mechanics", which is, by the way, pretty much the same as the result for "quantum entanglement" - 194000). I'll try to reply to other DrC's remarks later.