Anthony Fauci Caught ‘Lying’ – Several Times

Science doesn’t lie. But people sure do.

What is “science”?

SCIENCE:
 
1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws.
2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.
4. systematized knowledge in general.
5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.
6. a particular branch of knowledge.
7. any skill or technique that reflects a precise application of facts or principles.

Science is a set of facts and principles gained from knowledge and study into the experience and observation of the physical/material world.

FACTS. TRUTHS. PRINCIPLES.

I know I’m not the only one questioning why “science” seems to be changing at the whim of a small few. And who do we have at the helm of it all? Especially during these very confusing/controversial covid times?

Anthony Fauci, NIH, WHO, FDA and the CDC. (All “gold-standard, leading experts” that ironically are shifting, changing, removing what “science” has defined throughout all these years.)

Even his very own statements about science should shed some light on what science is supposed to be: “He added, “So, when they see someone up in the White House, which has an air of authority to it, who’s talking about science, that there are some people who just don’t believe that — and that’s unfortunate because, you know, science is truth. … If you go by the evidence and by the data, you’re speaking the truth.”
Anthony Fauci lied about masks; now he complains that people ‘distrust authority’

Yes. “If you go by the evidence and by the data, you’re speaking the truth.” – not if you’re making it up and changing it as you go along because it suits a particular agenda.

Let’s see how many times Mr. Dr. Expert Anthony Fauci and the co-horts of this agenda were caught lying or “changing” goalposts/rules and even the very definition of what herd immunity means (keep in mind, this is just a very small sample out of many) :

Wearing a mask:

1. Feb. 17 (2020): Fauci told USA Today that wearing a mask is for the infected to protect others. “Now, in the United States, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask.
The Fauci Timeline — Sorting Fact From Fiction

2. March 2020: “When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face,” said Fauci at that time.
FLASHBACK: Dr. Fauci claims masks don’t provide COVID protection, only help people ‘feel…better’

3. In June 2020, Fauci admitted that he and other public health officials had downplayed the benefit of masks — with some even advising against wearing them — because of a fear of equipment shortages for front-line health care workers.
Dr. Anthony Fauci Admits Shifting Goalposts on ‘Herd Immunity’

4. September 2020: “At that point, which is now months and months ago, I have been on the airways, on the radio, on TV, begging people to wear masks. And I keep talking in the context of wear a mask, keep physical distance, avoid crowds, wash your hands and do things more outdoors versus indoors.”

Fauci says Trump took his stance on masks ‘out of context’ during debate

5. By October (2020), Dr. Fauci had completely reversed course on mask-wearing, saying that it may be time to impose a nationwide mask-wearing mandate, something he termed “universal mask-wearing.”

“Well, if people are not wearing masks, then maybe we should be mandating it,” Fauci told CNN’s Erin Burnett Oct. 23.
FLASHBACK: Dr. Fauci claims masks don’t provide COVID protection, only help people ‘feel…better’

From a personal opinion: I want to point out how adamant Anthony Fauci is about flouting wearing a mask, yet here, he is not wearing one throughout his entire speech. Doesn’t he realize how far his droplets are landing? Not to mention that at the 19 minute mark we see press secretary Jen Psaki take the stand, without wiping down the potentially dangerous, deadly virus that Anthony Fauci could have been dispensing all over the podium.

Including that is the fact that Jen Psaki then takes her face masks (because, “double the protection”…) off as well, and flips it mouth-side down on the very podium that expert Anthony Fauci was just speaking at and spreading his germs. At the very end of the video, Jen is seen putting the mask back on, after letting it sit and fester on top of the stand that Dr. Fauci was just speaking over.

What has our common sense been reduced to?

Herd immunity:

6. Earlier on in the pandemic, Fauci had said the United States would need 60 to 70 percent of people to be vaccinated in order to reach herd immunity, according to the Times.
REPORT: Fauci Admits He Lied Because ‘Country Wasn’t Ready’ To Hear The Truth

7. Dr Fauci’s estimate for reaching herd immunity has been steadily inching up, @nytimes’ Donald McNeil Jr reports. Fauci told us at last week’s @CNBC #HealthyReturns that it may be 75-85%. https://t.co/j18nUYZ3cV pic.twitter.com/hIKewMAFim

— Meg Tirrell (@megtirrell) December 24, 2020
REPORT: Fauci Admits He Lied Because ‘Country Wasn’t Ready’ To Hear The Truth

8. “When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent,” Fauci told the Times. “Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ʻI can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.”

“We need to have some humility here,” he added. “We really don’t know what the real number is. I think the real range is somewhere between 70 to 90 percent. But, I’m not going to say 90 percent.”
Fauci doubles down after being confronted over startling admission that he deceived the public about herd immunity

We even have the WHO, who is constantly changing / “updating” their definition for what herd immunity means depending on the alleged “new” results and information that they determine from their studies.

Another change, once again, on December 21, 2020:

Yet another "update" explaining their change in definition.

Very suspect, Anthony Fauci and WHO. Very suspect.

And perhaps because of this exposure, they felt the need to “clarify”, this time taking into account not only the vaccines that they heap enormous praise and focus on, but this time alluding to the Samaritan goodness of their hearts that they do not feel as if herd immunity should be achieved by exposing people to the virus. But instead by using the vaccine. (Because they care so much.)

The question then is, who is going to protect us from the vaccine if/when it turns out (since new information comes out all the time…) that the vaccine was not as “safe and effective” as they once thought? Their inclusion that “WHO will continue to update these answers as new information becomes available.” leaves the door wide open to skirt away from any responsibility of the side effects of the vaccine due to not enough foresight because of the ever-evolving nature of this new virus and the vaccine that has yet to be studied thoroughly for long-term safety and effectiveness.

The argument then possibly becomes that their sincere effort to “save humanity” from this deadly pandemic overrides the vaccine effectiveness because of the huge demand to save the population (let’s not get into the depopulation agenda of Bill Gates – in which he and Anthony Fauci are close friends – and others… although, by all means, please research this to gain more information) and that they honestly, truly, genuinely sought to cure us all from this virus. The tragic outcome of the vaccine that they “earnestly” thought was for the benefit of the people would be unprecedented and the blame would then go to, again, the changing nature of the virus and/or our immune response system not adhering well to their honest-to-goodness efforts.

Sorry, but, I’m not buying it.

Asymptomatic vs. Symptomatic

9. January 2020: “But the one thing historically that people need to realize is that even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory viruses of any type asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there is a rare symptomatic transmission that may transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.
Here Is a Video of Fauci Explaining in January 2020 That Asymptomatic Transmission Is NEVER the Driver of Outbreaks

10. June 2020: Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove: “We’re constantly looking at this data, and we’re trying to get more information from countries to truly answer this question,” she added. “It still appears to be rare that an asymptomatic individual actually transmits onward.”

Anthony Fauci: “We know from epidemiological studies they can transmit to someone who is uninfected even when they’re without symptoms,” Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Wednesday. “So to make a statement to say that’s a rare event was not correct.”
Fauci says asymptomatic coronavirus transmission is possible following WHO confusion

11. September 2020: “I can tell you right now that we should be testing more and we should be testing asymptomatic people,” Fauci told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on Thursday night. “Take that to the bank and trust me on it.”
CDC reverses course on testing asymptomatic people for Covid-19, again

The PCR / covid tests:

12. Yet a PCR test instruction document from the CDC that had been revised five times as of July 13, 2020, specified testing and interpretation of the test using a Ct of 40. On September 28, 2020, a study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases from Jaafar et al. had asserted, based on patient labs and clinical data involving nearly 4,000 patients, that a Ct of 30 was appropriate for making public policy. An update to the CDC instructions for PCR testing from December 1, 2020, still uses a Ct of 40.
The WHO Finally Updates Its COVID-19 Testing Policy… One Hour After Biden’s Inauguration

13. Anthony Fauci (July 16, 2020): “…If you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…it’s just dead nucleoids, period.”
Fauci Himself Admits Covid PCR Test at Over 35 Cycles Is Deceitful, Worse Than Useless

14. Article published on September 30, 2020: The reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) test used to identify those people infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses a nasal swab to collect RNA from deep within the nasal cavity of the individual being tested. The RNA is reverse transcribed into DNA and amplified through 40 or more cycles, or until virus is detected. The result is reported as a simple “yes” or “no” answer to the question of whether someone is infected.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials state they do not specify the cycle threshold ranges used to determine who is positive, and that commercial manufacturers and laboratories set their own threshold ranges.

Any test with a cycle threshold (CT) above 35 is too sensitive, says Juliet Morrison, PhD, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 [cycles] could represent a positive.” A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less.

Coronavirus Cases Plummet When PCR Tests Are Adjusted

Yikes. There is so much wrong with these examples. Who is in charge, again? The labs/manufacturers can set their own threshold? Yet officials wouldn’t recommend anything higher than 35? Or even 30? Even Anthony Fauci, who finally wasn’t lying about the amount of cycles? Yet at what threshold were all of these tests being done to crank out all of these false positives that are, again, just now being addressed and changed? The FDA recommended threshold of 40 or as many as it takes “until virus is detected“?

Then pair that up with what Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test had to say:
“I don’t think you can misuse PCR. [It is] the results; the interpretation of it. If they can find this virus in you at all – and with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.”
Dr. Fauci admits the PCR test for coronavirus is all but useless as it is administered in the US

15. Dr. David Samadi (January 21, 2021): The World Health Organization has now released guidance to laboratories around the world to reduce the cycle count in PCR tests to get a more accurate representation of COVID cases.

The current cycle was much too high and resulting in any particle being declared a positive case.

The WHO notice concluded by suggesting that “most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.”
World Health Organization updates PCR test guidelines

So apparently all this time they weren’t assessing all of the other necessary relative data needed to confirm a positive case, and instead ran as many cycles as they possibly could to detect the virus – against the numerous prompts of the medical community who said all along that this was a huge oversight – meanwhile suspiciously cranking out positive numbers for the media to drool over. And as some people have pointed out, all of these new changes are “coincidentally” just in time to greet the new president as an illusion of control and miraculously reduced numbers of positive coronavirus cases. (Or it’s due to the fantastic work of the rushed vaccine – or both.)

Hydroxychloroquine

16. The Virology Journal – the official publication of Dr. Fauci’s National Institutes of Health – published what is now a blockbuster article on August 22, 2005, under the heading – get ready for this – “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread.” (Emphasis mine throughout.) Write the researchers, “We report…that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.

So why has Dr. Fauci minimized and dismissed HCQ at every turn instead of pushing this thing from jump street? He didn’t even launch clinical trials of HCQ until April 9 (2020), by which time 33,000 people had died.

Fauci knew about HCQ in 2005 — nobody needed to die

17. August 12, 2020: Since the start of the pandemic, hundreds of doctors have successfully used hydroxychloroquine to treat patients symptomatic of COVID-19 infections. In frustration at the media negativity about this safe, effective medicine American doctors have sent an open letter to Dr Fauci raising their concerns.
Doctors Send Open Letter to Fauci About HCQ COVID Cure

Other doubts from multiple outlets about the supposed “expert” decisions of those in charge:

Up until COVID hit in 2020, neither WHO nor the CDC had ever considered a single positive PCR test sufficient for diagnosing viral infection.

TOTAL COINCIDENCE ALERT: C19 Diagnostic Criteria Tightened by WHO on Biden Inauguration Day!

Sen. Marco Rubio just called out Anthony Fauci in a penned piece posted on Fox News as a lying liar who arrogantly used his position as the nation’s top infectious disease bureaucrat to lie to the American people “in order to manipulate their behavior.”

“[P]lacing blind faith in unelected celebrity scientists,” Rubio warned, “has its limits, and we must not be afraid to call them out when they’re caught overstepping their legitimate authority.”

Anthony Fauci’s ‘lying’ is hardly surprising

Also, the nation’s testing data has been called into question, as this week the CDC and 11 states were forced to admit that they were mixing testing results in a way that might make the data less useful in assessing the rate of the disease’s spread.

If it isn’t the nation’s mood, nor the science, could it be… politics?

Did Anthony Fauci Get Out-Foxed? Why His Reversal On Reopening Is So Troubling

Mea culpa: I spent a lot of time on these here digital pages defending Dr. Anthony Fauci. Brother, was I wrong. Fauci is a stone-cold liar. And if he’s not a stone-cold liar, his only defense is that he is a fraud. Either way, shame on him … and me.

Nolte: Dr. Fauci Is Either a Liar or a Fraud

Why all the changing rules contradicting those of other scientists/doctors?

One would think if an expert in his field had any real experience and knowledge about viruses, transmission, etc., that their “rules” would not keep changing based on the “popular view” or pressure to conform to what politics demands. With the “leadership” blaming all of the changes on this new virus/pandemic and that they have to adjust their position based on new findings/studies about it, it makes one wonder why their (the leading expert’s) initial view was so out of touch compared with the MANY other doctors/scientists who were saying all along that masks don’t work, lockdowns don’t work, we don’t need a vaccine because HCQ works and ivermectin, etc., etc., etc.

So again I ask you… what makes the NIH, CDC, WHO experts so much more knowledgeable about this ‘virus’, if they have been wrong countless times and only changing their views (they claim: “based on new findings”) if all of the scientists and doctors they were trying to silence this whole time due to “misinformation” and “false news” were RIGHT ALL ALONG?

What makes these few “leading experts”, who have been proven wrong time and time again, and who has changed their mind, time and time again, so much more authoritative and knowledgeable about this coronavirus situation than the numerous other doctors and scientists who have been right from the very beginning? The very same scientists and doctors who have been gaslighted and ridiculed, censored and banned, doxxed and attacked for sticking to their values and scientific findings that these other so-called “leading experts” are just now admitting are correct?

Why aren’t Fauci and the rest of the government alphabet crew (NIH, WHO, CDC, FDA, etc.) labeled as “misinformation” and “false news” when they were peddling all of their uncertain information to begin with; yet the actual scientific facts and findings of the medical community were called into question? Should the media who helped propagate these incorrect assessments be held liable as well?

How many people could have been saved if the world leaders (far be it for me to imply that some (most?) are in on a huge conspiratorial agenda…) would have listened to the multiple doctors and scientists/researchers advice instead of those at the head of these (quite possibly corrupt) funded agencies?

Has Anthony Fauci been lying this whole time (blaming citing ‘new information’) and just changing the goal posts to suit some other purpose?

PCR Inventory Kary Mullis on “Dr” Fauci:

He should not be in the position like he’s in.

Those guys have got an agenda. Which is not, what we would like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way. They’ve got a personal kind of agenda, they make up their own rules as they go, they change them when they want to – and they smugly – like Tony Fauci, does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his salary and lie directly into the camera.”

“You can’t expect the sheep, to really respect the best and the brightest. They don’t know the difference, really. I mean, I like humans, don’t get me wrong, but, basically, there is a vast majority of them do not possess the ability to judge who is and who isn’t a really good scientist. I mean, that’s a problem, that’s a main problem, actually with science, I’d say in this century, because scientists being judged by people, funding is being done by people who don’t understand it.”

President of the University of South Carolina asked Fauci if he’d come down there and debate me on stage in front of the student body because I wanted somebody who was, from the other side, to come down there and balance my – because I felt like, well, these guys can listen to me, but I need to have somebody else down here that’s going to tell me the other side. But Fauci didn’t want to do it…

An interesting piece from 1994 on Kary Mullis and his views on a couple of questionable individuals:

In the end, “Nightline” ran a two-part series, the first on Kary Mullis, the second on the HIV debate. Mullis was hired by ABC for a two-week period, to act as their scientific consultant and direct them to sources.

The show was superb, and represented a historic turning point, possibly even the end of the seven-year media blackout on the HIV debate. But it still didn’t fulfill Mullis’ ultimate fantasy. “What ABC needs to do,” says Mullis, “is talk to [Chairman of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony] Fauci and [Dr. Robert] Gallo [one of the discoverers of HIV] and show that they’re assholes, which I could do in ten minutes.

But I point out, Gallo will refuse to discuss the HIV debate, just as he’s always done.

“I know he will,” Mullis shoots back, anger rising in his voice. “But you know what? I would be willing to chase the little bastard from his car to his office and say, ‘This is Kary Mullis trying to ask you a goddamn simple question,’ and let the cameras follow. If people think I’m a crazy person, that’s okay. But here’s a Nobel Prize-winner trying to ask a simple question from those who spent $22 billion and killed 100,000 people. It has to be on TV. It’s a visual thing. I’m not unwilling to do something like that.”

He pauses, then continues. “And I don’t care about making an ass of myself because most people realize I am one.”

(Kary Mullis)
The Corona Simulation Machine: Why the Inventor of The “Corona Test” Would Have Warned Us Not To Use It To Detect A Virus

It seems as if this self-described “ass” actually has a heart of gold and was trying to expose possible corruption as early as the 1990’s.

As Celia Farber, the interviewer, mentions: “One time, in 1994, when I called to talk to him about how PCR was being weaponized to “prove,” almost a decade after it was asserted, that HIV caused AIDS, he actually came to tears.

Sadly Kary Mullis passed away on August 17, 2019, allegedly from pneumonia. Just weeks away from when Event 201 took place in October 2019, and a few more weeks from when an actual “surprise outbreak” erupted, allegedly as early as November 2019. And just a couple of months after that, we have the PCR tests that Mr. Kary Mullis himself invented and was against using for viral detection, being used (and abused) for viral detection en masse – at the behest of the “expert scientists”.

Science doesn’t lie. But people sure do.

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Featured image by Peggy und Marco Lachmann-Anke from Pixabay

Get an Earful

WORLD PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY! Stop Big Pharma’s DNA “Vaccine” Experiment! - “Mass Vaccination will Breed Dangerous Variants & Destroy Our Immunity” — Geert Vanden Bossche, PhD
Dr. Peter McCullough / John Leake – Full Interview [Transcript] - Renowned doctor exposes worldwide covid treatment suppression and corruption of the medical and governmental agencies.
Anthony Fauci’s Wife: Christine Grady – Hidden Face of the Vaccine Trials? - What is Christine Grady's role in the vaccine agenda?
REPOST: Proof that the Pandemic Was Planned With a Purpose - Many connections involving complicit huge name individuals and organizations.
FLASHBACK | COVER-UP: ‘Scientific Reductivism’, The Talented Mr. Fauci - A look into Anthony Fauci's involvement into medical/health corruption.
David Goldberg’s FINAL WORDS: Project Pogo and Project Zyphr | Full Transcript - Extermination effort and implementation of a world government.
“America’s Pastor” Billy Graham Exposed - Exposing Graham's ties to freemasonry and their agendas.

Genesis 6: Wickedness in the World

Earnest Examination

This series is presented as an honest, sincere look into the study of the Bible with my own personal theories, opinions, comments and that of others’ insights and research into what the verses could mean. I cannot claim one way or another that everything that I am stating is fact and the true meaning of what is meant in these verses.

To lay it out in a way that I can manage, I have highlighted the texts of verses that I either don’t understand or have a comment or question about in yellow. And the comments I’ve left beneath it will be of a smaller font and using brown text.

I would love it if you’d join me in this journey and if you have any insights and/or knowledge of these chapters/verses etc., please feel free to share with me and the other readers. Any chance to get a clearer understanding of the Bible and Jesus Christ would be welcomed with open arms.

All verses used are from biblestudytools.com (NIV) Genesis 6

Wickedness in the World

1 When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them,
2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
There are some speculation that what the Bible means with the phrase “sons of God” is simply describing men. Whether they could have been from the “Godly” line of Seth, intermarrying with the sinful lineage of Cain, or whether these men could have been kingly/rulers who thought of themselves as a god. Who are ‘the sons of God’ in Genesis 6?
However, when looking at the context, and especially knowing about the other books that were not included in the Bible but that did explain the details of this verse, it becomes clear that it was not simply describing men.
I think more of a question is to how these “sons of God” married and mated with the women to bring forth the nephilim. Obviously none of us are fully aware of their anatomy… but some theories that perhaps could explain this situation is that these beings did not mate with the women as we know it. If they are spiritual beings, then perhaps they either possessed actual human males in order to take upon themselves wives and procreate that way, or, perhaps they possessed the very woman they wanted and due to a supernatural birthing of sorts, could have forced the women to give birth to the nephilim. If we take the word “nephilim” as a different word for demon or spirit, perhaps, then it could be that what we think of as a literal “giant” is incorrect.

3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal ; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”
This verse takes me back to when God walked upon the land to confront Adam and Eve and then later Cain. It seems to indicate that God walked the Earth literally. In a physical form, of sorts. One could surmise that God meant metaphysically in this verse, however. Is He talking about His Spirit meaning the Holy Ghost? Is He talking about it in the sense that His Spirit will not stay in the hearts of men? Or that He Himself as a Spirit will not stay in our midst? Upon further research of this verse it could also indicate that what is meant by His Spirit is simply the breath of Life. Without God’s Spirit in us, we would die.
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
Here we see the term “Nephilim” for the first time. I honestly find it fascinating that the Gnostic books that go into detail about some of these controversial subjects have been hidden from the public. Whether the contents are true or not, it almost seems as if the very concerted effort to conceal these writings are hiding a certain kind of agenda. The search for truth is often frowned upon when compared with a strict religiosity.
(What would be the purpose of trying to hide certain content from believers, especially if there is a ring of truth to them?)
Now I also want to point out the phrase “heroes of old”. Immediately it brings to my mind the tales of Hercules or Thor, Krishna, Achilles, etc. Many myths/legends talk of these “heroes” or “sons of God” (at least according to the myths of the time) – Hercules and Perseus from Zeus, Thor from Odin, etc. Could these myths be based on fact? Was Zeus, Odin, Quetzlcoatl, Vishnu, etc. considered these “sons of Gods” and their offspring the “heroes of old”/nephilim that the Bible speaks of? This is purely speculation, but it does seem to eerily correlate to the myths from around the world.
I also want to mention that this verse states ‘and also afterward’… Does this imply that Nephilim exist even in today’s world? It’s assumed that everyone was wiped out due to the flood except for Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives. Perhaps this is true. Or perhaps some other beings were able to survive within mountains or other terrain that weren’t hit by the flood. And even if every living thing were wiped out, the ‘also afterward’ lends credence to the fact that the sons of God went again to the daughters of men and created more Nephilim.

5 The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.
6 The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.
My heart is deeply troubled from these verses.
One, are human beings really that bad that the only thing they think about are evil inclinations? I’m a human being and I’d like to think that my heart isn’t always consumed with evil thoughts. In fact, one of my goals is to appeal to others to do the right thing and choose love and integrity above anything else. I have huge love and compassion for people and the world (thanks to ‘divine intervention’, I should add) that it’s hard for me to fathom that there could be so much evil within the world and that most people’s hearts would be filled with wickedness.
Now, I have to admit, when I was younger, I was not the nicest person on the planet and in fact pretty much hated almost everyone. I was filled with anger and wrath and while these feelings were born out of frustration that ‘good’ people aren’t justified and that ‘evil’ tends to win, I was slowly becoming the very person I hated. Thanks to a spiritual enlightenment of sorts, I am no longer like that. So it makes me wonder if this intervention could appeal to other human beings in the same manner. Perhaps that is what is meant when Jesus said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” Maybe a Spirit or Spirits (Angel or Angels) tries to help all of us, but only certain people will actually heed their call.
My other concern with this is that God regretted creating humans. There’s always this agreement within the religious community that God is infallible and can do no wrong. However, according to this verse, God clearly regrets making a mistake. But this is a contradiction, is it not? How could an all-powerful, perfect being make a mistake? Unless, of course, He can’t – and it is only the biblical verse and/or the interpretation that is wrong.
Which is more plausible? That God created humans knowing that there was only going to be evil in their hearts, or that the bible throughout the ages has been mistranslated/corrupted by the hands of these “evil” men? And since I did not live during these times that the bible speaks of (at least, not to my knowledge…) I cannot say one way or another whether all (most) humans at the time only thought of evil/wicked things. It is sad though, if this is true, that the only few that God found worthy enough to spare are eight people total, and He also felt the need to wipe out most animals from the face of the Earth as well.
One more concern I have, is that after the above mention of Nephilim and the relation to “sons of God”, we don’t hear anything else about these creations until Numbers… What happened to them? According to the Bible, would a Nephilim be considered a human being? Or a different type of entity altogether? If they were born out of the union of a human and a fallen angel, then by all intents and purposes, they cannot be considered as a human being; although they could be considered a human-angel (or human-demon, if one is to theorize that a fallen angel becomes a demon) hybrid. There are also speculations that due to the corrupt nature of mankind during these times, that they also corrupted animals by making hybrids of them as well. (We can also see that in abundance in today’s society.) Could this be another reason that God wanted the animals wiped out, save for the pure few that God commanded Noah to save?

7 So the LORD said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”
8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

Noah and the Flood

9 This is the account of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.
10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence.
12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways.
When we look at this according to the lifetimes of the peoples on the planet at the time, the days from Adam to Noah expands just 10 generations, according to the Bible. And according to how long people lived during those times, despite the very verse above saying that the Spirit of God will remain with man for 120 years, the people in Noah’s days and earlier lived close to 1,000 years. …Are we misunderstanding the numerical terminology in these quotes? If Adam was created from the beginning and lived to 930 years old, while each generation afterwards lived on average for around 800 years, give or take a few, and the Bible never states definitively how many children each generation had, and during these times even with direct lineage from Adam, people still ended up violent and corrupt – not just some people but enough to really cause grievance to God, then what hope do we have who are living today with no real background as to our genealogy or relation to the Lord?
I am heartened by the fact that this is exactly why Jesus came, in order to teach the generations afterwards the “right” way to live which is to treat each other with love and respect. It’s interesting to me that from the beginning of time we’ve had the grievous sin of murder that Cain acted upon his brother due to jealousy. And what’s even more mind-boggling, is that we did not even hear what kind of corruption and wickedness took place during Noah’s timeframe to compel God to initiate the flood to wipe out the beings from the Earth to begin with. Everything we hear of the violence and corruption in the Bible occurred after the flood. And these were already incredibly atrocious. How much worse was it before the flood?

13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.
So I guess another question I have is, even though we saw Cain attack his brother Abel and commit violence at the beginning, could the rise of the people’s violence be due to the “sons of God” mingling with the humans? Would the violence and corruption be so bad without their interference? Or was it due to the people’s willingness to be corrupted by these “spirits/angels/etc.” that the wickedness exacerbated? Could this actually be what people think of as consorting with demonic entities?
14 So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out.
15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high.
16 Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit high all around. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks.
17 I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.
I am of the belief that while God’s intention was indeed to wipe out every “living” being on the planet, the one thing that may not have been taken into account was perhaps the spiritual entities that tainted mankind to begin with. If these “sons of God” or perhaps Watchers, as the Book of Enoch tells it, could wander the world as a spiritual form, then it wouldn’t be until the waters settled and more people were born that they once again inhabited or established their presence to corrupt humankind once again. This is just a theory, of course, and another theory that’s been proposed is that certain people/hybrids did indeed hide out in cavernous mountains, underground tunnels, etc. and only re-emerged once it was safe to do so. Of course, this would have been an oversight on the part of God, which would have had to take this into account and seems unlikely from an all-knowing God; so honestly I am not sure if any of these theories hold water (no pun intended).
18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife and your sons’ wives with you.
I have to point out the obvious: while Noah found favor in the Lord which allowed him and his family to be spared from the flood, it has to be stated that everything else wicked and corrupted that arose since the flood is due to the very people that were aboard the ark since they were allegedly the only survivors. Is this correct in this line of thinking? If the Bible is to be believed fully, then yes, we would have to believe that everyone else was wiped out from the flood, so whatever corruption and evil wickedness that arose in the hearts of mankind since then has to be attributed to this lineage.
On the other hand, if we are to consider the likelihood that other beings/spirits were able to survive the flood and continue their interference upon humankind, then it would fall in line with other speculations of the Nephilim quite possibly still living today.

19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.
20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.

I have to bring this up since it is a hotly debated topic, but the very specific mention of ‘male and female’ seems to indicate the natural response in order to keep a living being reproducing. The unity between a male/female in order to naturally create offspring. Of course “science” has other things in mind, whether it’s born out of “good intentions” or not, and in my honest opinion the measures that have been taken “in the name of science” have actually upset the natural order of things for one reason or another and is doing more damage than good.
There is a popular saying, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” and I feel this fits in nicely sadly here. There is a very controversial intent to normalize transgenderism, even among children, that I feel is leading us down a dangerous path. What may have been introduced as an inclusive, “compassionate” drive to not ostracize people that feel this way, has I think grown to an alarming precedence that alters the very natural fabric of our being. Instead of accepting others as they are naturally born, we are under the duress of an ever-changing and alternate agenda to corrupt mankind to our core.
These opinions could be unfounded, of course, but when one takes on the whole scope of history and the corruption that has been going on quite possibly since the beginning of time, it may not be that far-fetched.

The other interesting thing to note here is the specific wording that the animals will come to Noah to be kept alive. It seems deliberate; almost as if saying that the animals that come to Noah were led to do so. Perhaps by the Holy Spirit? But why would this be necessary? If humankind was evil and wicked, what would the need be to wipe out most of animal kind as well? Was it simply because they would have been caught up in the disaster of the flood due to the effort to wipe out most of humanity? Could it possibly have meant that even animals were corrupted by the wickedness of humankind as well? It just seems strange that a huge deluge was needed to wipe out most of the living beings on the planet if only humankind was the cause of God’s grievance. Is God not capable of just smiting human beings by withdrawing the Spirit of God from within them?
Perhaps I am just over analyzing.


21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them.”
22 Noah did everything just as God commanded him.

It makes me wonder, if we heard God’s voice talking to us in today’s day and age, would we just shrug it off as our imagination, or would we be discerning enough to wonder where it’s coming from? Would we attribute it to our conscience? Would we heed the directions like Noah did, or just dismiss it as a random, crazy thought?

Again, I want to reiterate that some of my thoughts and theories may be way off base, and I also research some other things on the side as well to try and get a broader understanding of what I’m reading, so please bear with me, or, even better, if you have insights that bring more light to these verses, please let me know.

I enjoy bouncing off theories and theology off of each other and love to hear other people’s perspectives on things. Thank you for reading and I look forward to hearing from you!

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Genesis 5: From Adam to Noah

Earnest Examination

To start, I’ve realized that I have never read the Bible front to back, and so would like to remedy that. On some of my posts, I quote from the Bible, which I feel is a little insincere if I’m not going to study the whole Bible. So this is my chance to get closer to the Word and really understand the book that I occasionally quote from. 

Originally, I was going to start with the New Testament as a friend has advised me to do, since when I started on the Old Testament I kept getting hung up on what I saw at the time were contradictions, and baseless wickedness and corruption. It repelled me from the Bible. She mentioned that that is exactly why Jesus Christ came. To do away with the “old” ways and bring about a new, better way of living. Which is to love and care about one another. The reason the Old Testament is so important is so that we know the conditions of how the world used to be, before Jesus Christ arrived to show us a more peaceful and loving way to be. 

Now that I feel I may have a better understanding of this, I am compelled to start from “The Beginning“, both literally and figuratively. After having attempted Matthew 3, I realize that I am constantly having the urge to go back through the Bible to check references and names, etc. Since my desire is to take this one step at a time and build upon the knowledge based upon the timeline laid out before us in the Bible, I have decided to revisit the time I tried to read the Bible front to back, and see if my old views still stand. 

Make no mistake, I will still have questions and ponderings about why God decided to do the things He’s done (and of course more questions on top of that), but I have learned not to condemn or judge such actions since I do feel some things are beyond our understandings and it is not my place to judge. I will try my best to look at it from an unbiased and simply curious, thoughtful mind. 

To lay it out in a way that I can manage, I have highlighted the texts of verses that I either don’t understand or have a comment or question about in yellow. And the comments I’ve left beneath it will be of a smaller font and using brown text.

I would love it if you’d join me in this journey and if you have any insights and/or knowledge of these chapters/verses etc., please feel free to share with me and the other readers. Any chance to get a clearer understanding of the Bible and Jesus Christ would be welcomed with open arms.

All verses used are from biblestudytools.com (NIV) Genesis 5

From Adam to Noah

1 This is the written account of Adam’s family line. When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God.
2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind” when they were created.
This verse is a little intriguing. It seems to allude that not only did God create Adam and Eve, but the wording seems to imply that God created other mankind too. Could it be possible that since the Bible is the story of Jesus, specifically, that we only see His timeline from when He was first created/born as Adam? Some people speculate that Jesus has been reincarnated through different incarnations since His first creation as Adam. If the Bible’s main focus is on Jesus, then it wouldn’t necessarily cover God’s other creations of mankind. Perhaps what we’re presented with in the Bible is only one story out of many.
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth.
There’s a popular saying: “You’re the spitting image of your father.”

FUNFACT:

The Phrase Finder suggests the phrase came into being as a morph from the original spit and image or, perhaps, spitten image. It notes that George Farquhar wrote the line, “Poor child! he’s as like his own dadda as if he were spit out of his mouth,” in his play “Love and a bottle” in 1689.

Charming, isn’t it?

But the Grammarist suggests a much older origin for the phrase spit and image, the predecessor of spitting image, pointing to the Biblical story of Adam’s creation, in which God created the first man from “spit and mud.”

Splitting Image or Spitting Image? Don’t Be Fooled!

Another theory:

Some of the folk etymologies have the spit (expectoration) and image (a doll) used in a black magic ceremony to clone you; others cite “spat” (the offspring of shellfish) as part of the origin. According to word sleuths William and Mary Morris, some linguistic experts think “spit” is derived from “spirit,” noting that the southern pronunciation of the letter r is sometimes indistinct. In other words, the original would have been, “She’s the very spirit and image of her mother.”

What’s the origin of “spitting image”?

It is interesting that this phrase has origins in spit and making a clone of you, since spit is a common way to obtain DNA from someone. And of course, there is research and science showing that cloning is possible.

4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.
This is the verse I was waiting for in the last chapter. I was questioning who was Cain’s wife since at that time, it was believed to only be Adam, Eve and Cain (since he killed his brother). But since we are presented with this verse, it becomes clear that his wife must have been a sister since there were presumably no other human beings around.
Which also brings me to the hypothesis from above that perhaps God did create more “mankind”, but we only learned of Adam and Eve’s conception.

5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
6 When Seth had lived 105 years, he became the father of Enosh.
7 After he became the father of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and had other sons and daughters.
8 Altogether, Seth lived a total of 912 years, and then he died.
9 When Enosh had lived 90 years, he became the father of Kenan.
10 After he became the father of Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and had other sons and daughters.
11 Altogether, Enosh lived a total of 905 years, and then he died.
12 When Kenan had lived 70 years, he became the father of Mahalalel.
13 After he became the father of Mahalalel, Kenan lived 840 years and had other sons and daughters.
14 Altogether, Kenan lived a total of 910 years, and then he died.
15 When Mahalalel had lived 65 years, he became the father of Jared.
16 After he became the father of Jared, Mahalalel lived 830 years and had other sons and daughters.
17 Altogether, Mahalalel lived a total of 895 years, and then he died.
18 When Jared had lived 162 years, he became the father of Enoch.
19 After he became the father of Enoch, Jared lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.
20 Altogether, Jared lived a total of 962 years, and then he died.
21 When Enoch had lived 65 years, he became the father of Methuselah.

A timeline showing the genealogy of these names can be found here.

So if we are to assume that there were no other human beings other than Adam and Eve’s lineage, then it’s obvious that intermarriage and/or just coupling with one another’s family members was culturally acceptable and the only way to populate. Upon further investigation, we know that this practice later becomes unacceptable due to genetic complications and the Lord speaking of this in Leviticus 18. I won’t get into that just now, but just thought it would be nice to mention that chapter as a reference.
And now that I think about it, the time frame of Genesis itself is a little questionable when we take into account who allegedly wrote Genesis and how many years must have transpired during that time. Not to mention the very destructive force of the flood and who and what it must have wiped out during its duration. Which begs the question, if the flood did indeed wipe out the rest of humanity other than Noah’s lineage like the Bible indicates, then did they keep accurate records and representation of the history and genealogy up until that point? Did they pass this information down throughout the years so that their children’s children will know exactly how the creation started and the names and times involved? If they didn’t, then we have to wonder how Moses (if he is indeed the one who wrote Genesis like some scholars claim) knew about God, Adam, Eve, and everything else that happened during Genesis. Was he just combining writings and texts from everything known and available since then and compiling them together to make the book?
22 After he became the father of Methuselah, Enoch walked faithfully with God 300 years and had other sons and daughters.
23 Altogether, Enoch lived a total of 365 years.
24 Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.

I had to hone in on the term “walked faithfully”, which presumably means metaphorically walking; as in, following his footsteps in a spiritual manner. Not that he physically walked with him. (Although as we saw in Genesis 3, God was described as physically walking in the Garden, so perhaps it could be used in that sense as well.)

Now I want to address the interesting differentiation between the phrase “he died” which was added to every man on this list except Enoch, which instead stated “he was no more”. Which would obviously point out that this was a special circumstance. So what does this verse mean?

One theory proposed here is that since Enoch followed God’s law and pleased Him so much with his righteousness, God did not let Enoch “see” death and instead whisked him peacefully away to… Heaven, presumably?
And if one wanted to do a little further digging into what made Enoch so special, there is the Gnostic Text (not in the Bible for one reason or another…), the Book of Enoch, that one could check out if they were curious or would like to do some investigative research.

It speaks of very fascinating things concerning the “Watchers” (another term for fallen angels – since their original role was to simply watch humans, but fell due to their desire to mingle and ‘procreate?’ with the humans instead. In the Book of Enoch, we see how Enoch tries to intercede on behalf of the fallen angels since the fallen angels actually implored Enoch to speak for them since they knew about his close relationship with God.

And as we’ll see in the next chapter, the implication of “sons of God” (speculated to be referred to as angels) mating with human women to give birth to the Nephilim is addressed very briefly. The Book of Enoch aims to fill some interesting holes into this theory.
25 When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he became the father of Lamech.
26 After he became the father of Lamech, Methuselah lived 782 years and had other sons and daughters.
27 Altogether, Methuselah lived a total of 969 years, and then he died.
28 When Lamech had lived 182 years, he had a son.
29 He named him Noah and said, “He will comfort us in the labor and painful toil of our hands caused by the ground the LORD has cursed.”
30 After Noah was born, Lamech lived 595 years and had other sons and daughters.
31 Altogether, Lamech lived a total of 777 years, and then he died.
32 After Noah was 500 years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth.
It has to be noted that while every single one of these firstborns are named to each man of this genealogy, it does not expand anywhere (at least not in this chapter..) about the other sons and daughters that it also mentions for each one. If each generation had a set of, say, 2+ pairs of a male to female ratio that also had children of their own, in addition to the main genealogy mentioned here, then there could be literally thousands of people wandering the Earth leading up to the flood, depending on how many different pairings/offspring were alive and procreating at that point. (Add to that, if one is to take the theory of fallen angels also taking upon themselves women and creating more offspring from them, then there could be countless of people/nephilim inhabiting the land during that time. It is also worth noting that there are theories that the flood was delivered in order to wipe out the nephilim from the planet. We will dig into that theory more in the next chapter.)

The next chapter delves into the famous flood and the probable causes of what initiated it. Whether it is biblically accepted or not, the implications on why the flood happened have been debated and studied upon for centuries without a clear answer. So we’ll take a good, long look at that next.

And again I want to reiterate that some of my thoughts and theories may be way off base, and I also research some other things on the side as well to try and get a broader understanding of what I’m reading, so please bear with me, or, even better, if you have insights that bring more light to these verses, please let me know.

I enjoy bouncing off theories and theology off of each other and love to hear other people’s perspectives on things. Thank you for reading and I look forward to hearing from you!

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.