Which governmental institution's claims are more trustworthy the IPCC or NIST--or should we believe them both?

Question

Because NIST has scientists, experts, and computer models, too!

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_videos/wtc_videos.html

Answer 1

The IPCC and NIST happen to both be right (the myth of credible scientists who disagree with the IPCC on anything other than details really does need to die).

BTW: Never heard of NIST?  Are you joking?

Answer 2

Actually, the correct answer is NEITHER institution is trustworthy.  I don't have room for both, but I can cite examples where NIST in particular has lied, and give proof of their lies.

Its OK that people haven't heard of NIST.  In fact, before 9/11, almost no one knew or gave a rats a#% about NIST.  Including the people who are on here trying to act bewildered about you not previously hearing of NIST.    

"The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a non-regulatory federal agency under the aegis of the Undersecretary for Technology in the U.S. Department of Commerce. It is concerned with maintaining measurement standards and developing technology in order to improve productivity, promote commerce, and enhance the qualify of life in the United States. It also has a number of security functions, which have come to the forefront in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks upon the United States."

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3403...

As it says, NIST is part of the Federal Government.  Which means its investigation of 9/11 is in NO WAY independent.  Until the Government allows a true Independent Investigation, why should the American people blindly put their Faith in NIST?  Its funny, because every lame debunker answer states that we should trust them, and then gives no clear or rational reason why.  Their trust is therefor not based on logic, but faith.  Sorry guys, but the faith in the government tactic assuages no one's suspicions.

NIST Lie:   NIST has consistently claimed there was no MOLTEN STEEL found during the clean up of the WTC and no 2800 F heat.  THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.  Here is a head engineer for NIST claiming that no one found Molten Steel, watch how he stutters when confronted;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8s...  

Now, here is irrefutable proof of Molten Steel and 2800 F heat in this CNN report and the proof that he and NIST lied:

http://www.livevideo.com/video/690AB7EDC...

Make sure to watch till the end.  Why is the Molten Steel important?  The existence of Molten Steel is all the proof the 9/11 Truth movement needs to show that the planes did not bring down the buildings and that Thermite was used.  Bottom line; Molten Steel = inside job.  No one can refute this and still retain a rational and scientific position.  For a deeper explanation, read this:

http://www.neithercorp.us/nforum/indepen...

Government and its respective agencies should NEVER be given the benefit of the doubt.  They should ALWAYS be investigated, especially when they are caught in a lie, as I have just done with NIST.

EDIT:  LOL!  I still don't see anyone challenging the information I've presented.  Come on guys, I'm calling you out!  What are you going to do about it?

Oh, and Jag:  Good for you.  If you've heard of NIST, that obviously means everyone else has, right?

Answer 3

You should never take what anyone says as being correct on face value, I dont know of the NIST, but never trust any body that has to justify its own existance and is politically driven.

"when all men think alike, no one thinks very much"

Answer 4

We should believe them both.

Why wouldn't we (real reasons, not baseless conspiracy theories please)?

Answer 5

IPCC re-wrote the climate history because it didn't fit their agenda.  

That's why we wouldn't.

Answer 6

Apples and Oranges.

I'm an Engineer and fully understand the analysis and conclusions of NIST.

I'm not an environmental scientist, but have reviewed enough of the IPCC reports to know they haven't produced conclusive evidence to prove that man is the culprit for global warming.

There is enough contrary evidence to make me doubt this UN founded organization.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm#...

Answer 7

I'm not sure about NIST, how relevant are they?  But the IPCC is just the puppet hanging on the UN's strings and I don't believe much of what they come up with.  They're far too political and unscientific.

Answer 8

The difference is that there weren't any credible scientists supporting the ridiculous 9/11 conspiracy theories. IPCC has scientists that dispute it's conclusions. Two very different things.

Also, structural and architectural computer models are very very different from climate models. We can claim to know all if not most the physics and dynamics of structural science, however we can't say the same for all the climate factors.

Also, IMO the U.N. is one of the most useless and most corrupt organizations in the world.

P.S. Whats with all these people that have never hear of NIST?

EDIT: There were numerous organizations and Universities not just NIST that conducted studies and concluded that 9/11 conspiracy were baseless.

EDIT: Oooop, we have our first 9/11 conspiracy theorist. And it is surprising that so many people haven't heard of NIST after 9/11, at least to me, because I'd heard of them.

Answer 9

Linking global warming to 9/11 conspiracy theories, What Next!

perhaps Atlantis, and deniers wonder why few take them seriously.