MIB Posted 1 hour ago Moderator Posted 1 hour ago 2 hours ago, Huntster said: So are almas a false myth, another primate species, feral humans, or yet another human species? We do not know. We can't prove or disprove anything. We don't have a confirmed Alma to test any more than we have a confirmed Bigfoot to test. We need to get away from this weird human quirk of preferring an unsupportable answer over an unanswered question. We can't have science when our personal dogma is stopping us from looking at answers. We need to be careful about investing ego in answers we really can't back up with facts. This aspect of the BF community, here and elsewhere, is wearing me out and truly tempting me to walk away.
Huntster Posted 27 minutes ago Posted 27 minutes ago 1 hour ago, norseman said: I am gonna go out on a limb….and say that it was a nutty professor. What did I win? So "wild man" reports can be semi-feral Homo sapiens even in sasquatch range? Your winning answer hasn't arrived yet. Let's see if your limb can continue to hold you...........
Huntster Posted 18 minutes ago Posted 18 minutes ago 1 hour ago, norseman said: I don’t know what an Almas is or is not. But either way it’s not connected to Zana.......... The people of Tkhina believed she was an almas because she fit the description of an almas quite perfectly. Who are you to proclaim them incorrect? Quote .......I will give the villagers the benefit of the doubt and say misidentification.......... Let us review the definition of an almas yet again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almas_(folklore) Quote .........Nikolay Przhevalsky described the almas in 1876, as related to him under the name kung-guressu ("man-beast"), as follows: "We were told that it had a flat face like that of a human being, and that it often walked on two legs, that its body was covered with a thick black fur, and its feet armed with enormous claws; that its strength was terrible, and that not only were hunters afraid of attacking it, but that the inhabitants removed their habitations from those parts of the country which it visited".[10] Heaney suggests that the almas should be identified with the Arimaspi, a group of legendary humanoid creatures said to inhabit the Riphean Mountains.[5] Scholar Damdinzhavyn Maidar [mn] has provided the following description in 1981: Almases, according to the stories of witnesses, appear half animal, half human, with reddish black hair. The face is hairless, the stomach covered with sparse growth. The head seems pointed at the occiput, the forehead flattened back with projecting brow ridges, and prominent cheekbones. They are the height of an average person. The almas walks with half-bent knees, is round-shouldered and pigeon-toed. It has broad shoulders and long arms. The women have long breasts. Almases are timid, suspicious, but are not aggressive, and lead a nocturnal way of life. No-one has heard their speech.[12] Heaney suggests that the almas should be identified with the Arimaspi, a group of legendary humanoid creatures said to inhabit the Riphean Mountains... They feed on roots and plants."[5] How does the description not fit that? Are you now going to accuse the villagers of "embellishing" again?
norseman Posted 15 minutes ago Admin Posted 15 minutes ago 9 minutes ago, Huntster said: So "wild man" reports can be semi-feral Homo sapiens even in sasquatch range? Your winning answer hasn't arrived yet. Let's see if your limb can continue to hold you........... Did you read the article you linked? Yes. A naked professor running around in the Sierras in the 1930s, is still a homo sapien.🤷🏻♂️ 4 minutes ago, Huntster said: The people of Tkhina believed she was an almas because she fit the description of an almas quite perfectly. Who are you to proclaim them incorrect? Let us review the definition of an almas yet again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almas_(folklore) How does the description not fit that? Are you now going to accuse the villagers of "embellishing" again? Show me a picture.
Recommended Posts