I have trouble understanding the mathematical arguments behind this view but I thought I would post it, in case anybody has any information/understanding/insights. The basic idea is that the mathematical assumptions on which the validity of Bell's inequality depends are that all the random variables are defined on a single probability space. These authors then go on to question this assumption using a Bohrian-type argument which they refer to as "the chameleon model". Note that this has nothing to do with questioning loopholes, etc. as they are suggesting that Bell’s argument fails even before the issue of these loopholes. Also, note, that they are not basing their arguments on the contextuality as per Kochen-Specker theorem, as they question the assumptions behind this theorem also. There are a number papers/books taking this perspective: Locality and Bell's inequality http://cds.cern.ch/record/445808/files/0007005.pdf Chameleon effect, the range of values hypothesis and reproducing the EPR-Bohm correlations http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0611259.pdf Is the Contextuality Loophole Fatal for the Derivation of Bell Inequalities? http://dare.uva.nl/document/358619 Non-Kolmogorovian Approach to the Context-Dependent Systems Breaking the Classical Probability Law http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-013-9725-5 For anyone who has some understanding of Probability theory, do these Non-Kolmogorovian approaches/axioms seem reasonable/make sense?