It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 1 2009 @ 11:46 PM

The Almas, Mongolian for "wild man," is a purported hominid cryptozoological species reputed to inhabit the Caucasus and Pamir Mountains of central Asia, and the Altai Mountains of southern Mongolia.[1] The creature is not currently recognized or cataloged by science. Furthermore, scientists generally reject the possibility that such mega-fauna cryptids exist, because of the improbably large numbers necessary to maintain a breeding population[2] and because climate and food supply issues make their survival in reported habitats unlikely


Almases are typically described as human-like bipedal animals, between five and six and a half feet tall, their bodies covered with reddish-brown hair, with anthropomorphic facial features including a pronounced browridge, flat nose, and a weak chin.[5] Many cryptozoologist researchers believe there is a similarity between these descriptions and modern reconstructions of how Neanderthals might have appeared


Speculation that Almases may be something other than legendary creatures is based on purported eyewitness accounts, alleged footprint finds, and interpretations of long-standing native traditions, which have been anthropologically collected

Sightings recorded in writing go back as far back as the 15th century.

In 1430, Hans Schiltberger recorded his personal observation of these creatures in the journal of his trip to Mongolia as a prisoner of the Mongol Khan.[8] Schiltberger also recorded one of the first European sightings of Przewalski horses. (Manuscript in the Munich Municipal Library, Sign. 1603, Bl. 210)(Shackley, 94). He noted that Almasty are part of the Mongolian and Tibetan apothecary's materia medica, along with thousands of other animals and plants that live today.[9]

British anthropologist Myra Shackley in Still Living? describes Ivan Ivlov's 1963 observation of a family group of Almas. Ivlov, a pediatrician, decided to interview some of the Mongolian children who were his patients, and discovered that many of them had also seen Almases. It seems that neither the Mongol children nor the young Almas were afraid of each other. Ivlov's driver also claimed to have seen them (Shackley, 91).


Myra Shackley and Bernard Heuvelmans have speculated that the Almases are a relict population of Neanderthals, while Loren Coleman suggests surviving specimens of Homo erectus. Others insist they are related to the Yeti of the Himalayas, being closer to apes than to humans. Another explanation is that human-like cryptids are humans with congenital disorders and/or mental retardation and ejected from society.

Another explanation is that they are purely mythological creatures, since no hard evidence (skeletons, specimens, etc.) has been found to date

Im not really sure what to make of this.
Could they be whats being called the "Yeti" in the Himalayas? or are they something different?Perhaps they are just legend/folklore
Pretty interesting stuff either way.

[edit on 1-11-2009 by FoxMulder91]

posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 10:51 PM

Heres a segment from Arthur C Clarkes Mysterious World series from the early 80's with a part about the Almas, along with a couple of other stories of European wildmen.

The Almas are slightly different to Bigfoot and Yeti on the fact that like the Orang Pandek they are often reported wearing rudimentary clothing. ie they have a possible definite culture of sorts or a much higher IQ.

Although in that Arthur C Clarke segment they indicate the Alma are possibly Neanderthals, like your quotes mention.

Segment starts at 2:40 about the Alma. Oh for a show like 'Mysterious World' these days... facts and witness testimonies and none of that Discovery channel hype and flare.

Edit:- nice you mention Myra Shakley, and nicer still is the videos cover image is of Myra herself

I still laugh when some people try to say something isnt real because no material evidence has been found, since often the places these things reside are so inhospitable or remote that it would not only cost huge sums of money and time to go look, it might just well kill you to boot. hHeck I say the same about things like sea serpents, for all we know they might live at the bottom of the pacific trench... in which case there could be millions of em, but you'd spend a life time looking for one and never find a damn scrap of evidence
, doesnt mean they DONT exist. So to out right reject them as a figment on lack of material evidence is so illogical.

[edit on 2-11-2009 by BigfootNZ]


log in