[threadbear]

Does it do any good for govt ponsored agencies to investigate govt based corruption? Are blue ribbon panels, composed of countless credentialled experts worth anything if they are sponsered by the guilty party?

Why do otherwise intelligent people not understand why a lack of objectivity is built into a study where the perpetrator funds the investiagation into the crime, after the fact.

What is wrong with people?

The same people who trust govt. reports on 911, also trust govt sponsored statisitics on the economy. I don't get it. The govt has proven time and time again it can't be trusted.

If the Sopranos launched an investigation into organized crime, should they be trusted? And if they assembled all of the best minds in the land to form a committee, how many individuals would step forward and disagree with them?

[AirlinePilot]

While I dont disagree with your premise thread, I'd submit that you go and ask the folks who have done those studies about whatever events your implying. I doubt your going to find everyone at places like NIST who will "go along" just because the government sponsored this or that study. Your lumping everyone into the same boat, and no matter how much you squirm about it, there is no way that is true.

There are standards of conduct for professionals to meet, and most of these kinds of folks dont take kindly to being labeled the way your doing. I'm sure they also take a lot of pride in doing objective rather than subjective work. It's what gives them credibility over the long haul.

I'm sure there are plenty of folks there who feel just like you do.
I'm not just reffering to NIST either, thats just an example of course. I'm sure the FAA, FEMA, the NTSB, FBI etc all have folks who are there because they want to do a job of integrity and truth.

[mmasters]

There are standards of conduct for professionals to meet, and most of these kinds of folks dont take kindly to being labeled the way your doing. I'm sure they also take a lot of pride in doing objective rather than subjective work. It's what gives them credibility over the long haul.

<snip>
I'm sure the FAA, FEMA, the NTSB, FBI etc all have folks who are there because they want to do a job of integrity and truth.

Sure there's many good people at the bottom, some in the middle and even a few high up. However the name of the game is continued funding. It's how those results are manipulated at the top to insure a particular client's needs are met.

[threadbear]

While I dont disagree with your premise thread, I'd submit that you go and ask the folks who have done those studies about whatever events your implying. I doubt your going to find everyone at places like NIST who will "go along" just because the government sponsored this or that study. Your lumping everyone into the same boat, and no matter how much you squirm about it, there is no way that is true.

There are standards of conduct for professionals to meet, and most of these kinds of folks dont take kindly to being labeled the way your doing. I'm sure they also take a lot of pride in doing objective rather than subjective work. It's what gives them credibility over the long haul.

I'm sure there are plenty of folks there who feel just like you do.
I'm not just reffering to NIST either, thats just an example of course. I'm sure the FAA, FEMA, the NTSB, FBI etc all have folks who are there because they want to do a job of integrity and truth.

Those at NIST and other govt. funded agencies, will NOT formulate hypotheses, based on evidence, that support a MIHOP or even a LIHOP explanation of events. It's peer pressure, following cues, etc... I hardly need to explain to you how the role of ridicule, humiliation and fear of being considered a "wing nut" suppress a person's own innate desire to consider unpopular theories.

My God, Airline Pilot, rididule keeps anonymous posters from arguing on threads on internet forums. Can you imagine how effective peer pressure would be at quelling a professional whose career may be on the line?

Commissions to investigate matters, where there is a suspicion of guilt of govt, have to be completely independant--of government. If a really independant commission came out with the exact same findings, not only would I embrace them, I would be more than happy to do it. Seriously-- I'm not wedded to any belief and I'd actually prefer to believe the govt's theory.

[AirlinePilot]

My God, Airline Pilot, rididule keeps anonymous posters from arguing on threads on internet forums. Can you imagine how effective peer pressure would be at quelling a professional whose career may be on the line?

I cant go along with that assesment. The kinds of people who populate these types of organizations are professionals whose livelyhood regularly depends on them being impartial and objective. It's usually why they are there. I'm not saying your wrong just that my experience with one or two of these type agencies does not support your theory. Peer pressure is part of thier daily life and If they can't take it, they don't last in those positions.

Not everyone cow tows to the man. Some do, yes, but organizations meant to do investigative research, scientific or engineering studies aren't populated by your average internet dweller.

A little paranoia concerning the government isn't a bad thing, but I don't share your level is what I'm saying. I do have some limited experience with these types of folks in my background.

[NEOPO]

No! their livelihoods depend on them not rocking the boat just as your livehood depends on global warming not being reality which means bye bye most airplanes eventually. The same thing applies to Resource war and your ability to go zoom zoom.

In the past year or so many many proofs of government censorship on science publications has come to light.
They have tried to and in some instances successfully suppressed PO, CLIMATE CHANGE and most of the facts concerning 911 and if they dont censor it then they twist and spin it.
Oh you know I could just go on and on from pre history to the present day about all the mass manipulation yet I am speaking to choir mainly as the PO.COM 911 poll showed clearly.
It is you AP who stand in a very tiny group of deniers acting as CHEERLEADERS for the official batch of lies.
You look kinda cute.

[Plantagenet]

The idea that everyone who works for the government now or who has worked for the government in the past or received scientific grants from the government is engaged in massive overlapping conspiracies is silly.

The problem isn't conspiracy and hidden evil-doers. The problem is the same as its always been....huge government bureaucracies are intrinsically unwieldly, slow, and inefficient.

Nonetheless, when the US government turns its attention to a scientific issue or a technical problem, it can bring tremendous resources to bear.
Its taken years for the NIST bureacracy to grind out their reports, but its silly to ignore them now or to pretend that they are contrived and intentionally misleading.

[mmasters]

The idea that everyone who works for the government now or who has worked for the government in the past or received scientific grants from the government is engaged in massive overlapping conspiracies is silly.

The problem isn't conspiracy and hidden evil-doers. The problem is the same as its always been....huge government bureaucracies are intrinsically unwieldly, slow, and inefficient.

Nonetheless, when the US government turns its attention to a scientific issue or a technical problem, it can bring tremendous resources to bear.
Its taken years for the NIST bureacracy to grind out their reports, but its silly to ignore them now or to pretend that they are contrived and intentionally misleading.

If you don't think there's any serious agendas in government can I have some of what you're smoking?

[Plantagenet]

Of course the government has multiple agendas. It has so many agendas it is often in conflict with itself.

Hadn't you noticed that?

The government isn't monolithic.

It contains and represents multiple branches, divisions, political parties, special interest groups etc. etc.