I'd like to present an argument against the idea that Bell's theorem eliminates local-realistic, hidden-variable theories as possible candidates for a better understanding of QM. Premise 1. There is good evidence that the fundamental theory describing our universe will be a theory of fields (or some other concepts for what the fields known today will be an approximation). Justification: Both QFT and GR are theories of this sort. Premise 2. There is good evidence that the fundamental field/fields described by the fundamental theory will be infinitely ranged fields. Justification: 2 of the 4 known forces are of this type (electromagnetism and gravity) Premise 3. A system of particles interacting through an infinitely-ranged field cannot be split in independent subsystems. Justification: The motion of each particle is determined by the resultant field of all particles, removing one or more particles from the calculation would lead to errors. Conclusion 1: from Premises 1,2 and 3 it follows that there is good evidence that our universe cannot be separated into independent subsystems. Premise 4: Bell's theorem stands on the assumption that the source of entangled particles and the 2 detectors are independent systems. Justification: one cannot derive Bell's theorem if the hidden variable determines not only the particles' properties but the settings of the detectors as well. Conclusion 2: from Conclusion 1 and Premise 4 it follows that Bell's theorem is irrelevant for our universe.