> I think they like exotic and unintuitive sounding stuff.

Exactly the opposite, nonlocality is by far the most exotic resolution here. It means losing existence and uniqueness of solutions to differential equations - i.e., causation.

Could you expand on this, or provide a source? I don't see how physics could yield a pure math result like that.

Other way around. Of course physics has nothing to do with whether a theorem is true or false - but it has everything to do with whether our universe satisfies that theorem's hypotheses.

I'm also struggling to make sense of what you're saying. Non-local measurement outcomes have very little to do with causality. Are you arguing against specific interpretations such as Bohmian mechanics, which require privileged space–time foliations?

>> Exactly the opposite, nonlocality is by far the most exotic resolution here.

I think a multiverse, or anything "spooky at a distance" or the other stuff is exotic. Non-locality does take away our ability to do experiments in isolation I suppose, which is kind of a big problem, but it is limited to certain kinds of experiments and not (seemingly) relevant at larger scales.