I guess I question the bias/motivations of the independent team, moreso than the independence of it.

If one team of scientists believe that the issue is too important to tell the truth... then can another team be fully trusted?

If the truth was that mankind did not land on the moon in 1969, but that the US Gov't lied in an effort to gain the upper hand in the space race (which hand it clearly did gain)... furthermore, if that truth would potentially unravel the fragile relationship of trust that the US Gov't has with its peoples and the peoples of the world... And you stood in a position to tell everyone this truth... would you consider the truth to do more good or harm in this case? Could you at least understand the motivation someone would have to knowingly lie about it in the name of preserving peace and the prosperity of this great nation? Who would the truth hurt?

If you believe that mankind is destroying the earth, and are a scientist tasked with proving it with concrete data... but the data proves to be elusive... Wouldn't you believe it to be the right thing to tell a little lie, especially if you believe that that lie will save the future of mankind?