I'm not convinced. (But also I'm not a physicist).
Don't get me wrong, they are all great experimentalists and their experimental work helped move the science forward in the understanding and control of the atomic scale.
But their "Bell's experiment" variations have been used to "disprove" and cast aside wide branches of theoretical research, and this will probably remain as one of the biggest failure of modern science.
If you model the experimental settings in your theory, it's indeed quite simple to reproduce the QM probabilities (and therefore violations of CHSH inegalities), with a local hidden variable theory.
Don't get me wrong, they are all great experimentalists and their experimental work helped move the science forward in the understanding and control of the atomic scale.
But their "Bell's experiment" variations have been used to "disprove" and cast aside wide branches of theoretical research, and this will probably remain as one of the biggest failure of modern science.
If you model the experimental settings in your theory, it's indeed quite simple to reproduce the QM probabilities (and therefore violations of CHSH inegalities), with a local hidden variable theory.
In fact here is 60 lines of numpy code to set-up virtual experiments to convince yourself (try various settings for the polarisers angles alpha and beta) https://gist.github.com/unrealwill/2a48ea0926deac4011d268426... (Straight implementation of Marian Kupczynski "Closing the Door on Quantum Nonlocality" https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/20/11/877 (around eq.7-8) if you need more explanation).