Which bibliometrics index to trust more?
The short answer is NONE. A longer answer is "to get the scientific excellence of an author, read their papers and understand their contributions".

The problem here is in expecting a number to characterize the contributions and quality of an individual researcher. Probably the only way in which these measures can be useful (and that's stretching it a LOT) is if they are viewed in aggregate (for a department/university) to get a very crude picture of research productivity (not excellence).

But the signal is so noisy as to be useless. 

Really, there's no shortcut for the hard work of reading, researching and asking in order to assess the "scientific excellence" of a researcher.