And the Nobel Prize for physics goes to...

 Alain Aspect, John Clauser, and Anton Zeilinger for their work in proving Bell's Theorem.

Of course, Bell's Theorem proves nothing, but that is beside the point.

Bell's Theorem ignores the probabilities of the outcomes happening, applying an equal probability to each - but only for the "classical" side of the argument. It therefore assumes it own conclusion, and then forces that to happen. When you assume that particles don't behave in the way they are known to behave, and then rigorously test them, of course they behave otherwise! 

Let me make an analogy: I hold in my hand a rock. When I toss it up, it may: 

1. Keep going up forever. 
2. Slow down and eventually stop.
3. Slow down then accelerate downwards. 

There are three possible outcomes, so each has probability 1/3. But wait! I imagine a fourth outcome.

4. Accelerate upwards ever faster. 

Now there are four possible outcomes, each with probability 1/4. But wait!  I imagine a fifth outcome.

5.  The rock will disappear in a puff of purple smoke.

Now there are five possibilities, each with a probability of 1/5.  That's logic!  And if I test it by actually throwing a real rock, and any outcome happens more than 1/5 of the time, then the world is inherently random and illogical, and the underlying science is inherently unknowable.

Do you see the error in this argument? I sincerely hope you do. Because this lies at the very heart of Bell's Theorem, and is the entire basis for his famous inequality.