Is It Real? Russian Bigfoot

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on November 20th, 2006

Loren detailed this episode of National Geographic’s Is It Real? in March and August of this year. Loren’s posts are:

Almas 2006 Expedition


Nat Geo’s New Hominology Documentary

WV Almas

Science books say Neanderthals went extinct around 30,000 years ago. But what if they still exist today? Rumors swirl that a stone-age man called “wildman” or “man of the forest” lives in the remote mountains of Russia. Join Is it Real? as NGCinvestigates the evidence, including a Russian hominologist who claims to have skulls and hair samples.

The episode airs tonight on the National Geographic Channel at 7 & 10 PM CST. It re-airs on Saturday at 5 PM CST and again on Saturday, December 2 at 5 PM CST.

There is a preview video on MSN for the show. Here is the link: Is It Real? Russian Bigfoot

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.

33 Responses to “Is It Real? Russian Bigfoot”

  1. sasquatch responds:

    They look like witchfoots.

  2. fredfacker responds:

    Talk about horrible costumes.

  3. sschaper responds:

    Worst costumes I’ve seen in a long time. Is that a klingon face mask on the male?

  4. cor2879 responds:

    Don’t bother… in my experience the answer to every “Is It Real?” is “No it isn’t”. Of course it helps when their mind is already made up before they even make the show…

  5. mememe responds:

    Ive seen better make up on the Movie “Carry on Screaming”

  6. Ceroill responds:

    This is the same show (not the same episode, of course) that put great prominence on a man claiming to have been the ‘guy in the suit’ for P/G. They talked about how locals have for years noticed his odd way of walking, seemingly so much like Patty’s gait, and other ‘details’, and since he admitted it, it must be true. Sigh.

  7. jjames1 responds:

    In a few years, can we expect stills from this show to emerge as ‘proof’ that there’s a bigfoot in Johor? 😉

  8. Lee Pierce responds:

    sschaper has it right about the Klingon face. Now we know what Klingon’s look like without their clothes on.

  9. dharkheart responds:

    I’m watching the program as I type this.

    I have never heard about anyone possessing the skull of Zana or her son, Khwit.


  10. ArmChairCryptoGuy responds:

    I don’t know why I watch these shows. Why can’t someone come forth and put up a ton of cash and do some real investigations?

  11. joppa responds:

    I think that we fail to discriminate between relic hominids such as Russian Almas and Bigfoot/Yeti creatures. At least I think there is a significant difference. The Russian Almas or Almasty seem a lot closer to human than bigfoot. Seems by mixing our nomenclature, we create more confusion than we need.

    If we discover Russian Almas to exist, that doesn’t prove Bigfoot’s presence. Two different species, two different worlds.

  12. Senor Chubba responds:

    At least the guy with a mohawk and our russian comrade had a drink at the end. Now where did I leave my rubber ducky?

  13. Ceroill responds:

    I think it’s mostly those not so closely studying cryptozoology who tend to confuse them. Anyone who really looks at even just the stories about both can see the differences. But to the Media I think anything from hominid to unknown ape to whatever is going to be lumped under the ‘bigfoot’ banner.

  14. Bonehead_AZ responds:

    I hate the “Is it Real/No it Isn’t” program.

  15. oroblanco responds:

    I think National Geographic should change the title of this program series to “It Isn’t Real”

  16. Raptorial responds:

    I missed it due to satellite problems, and thus have nothing I can truly say except how every episode seems to say “Hey, we can disprove that!”, which is an attitude I thoroughly dislike.

  17. Shihan responds:

    No jjames1 – just a pencil drawing of the eyes!

  18. dialthree responds:

    Pretty hacky program. Discovery seems to handle these better.

  19. jayman responds:

    I missed the show, but it’s sure to be rerun. Evidently it was about the “Zana” story.
    But, as others have noted, National Geographic is a pillar of scientific orthodoxy and we’re never going to get a really impartial hearing there. They might call it “Is It Real? – Not!”

  20. Riptor responds:

    Seems kind of doubtful to me. Besides, if there were any Neanderthals still alive today, wouldn’t they be less hairy than regular ones? Surely as the Earth became warmer, they would have lost most of their “fur”?
    Correct me if I’m wrong.

  21. Craig Woolheater responds:

    As noted above:

    It re-airs on Saturday at 5 PM CST and again on Saturday, December 2 at 5 PM CST.

  22. mystery_man responds:

    I don’t think they would neccessarily lose their hair, Riptor. A lot of animals living in some pretty hot places still have hair. And many types of primates live in hot rain forests, but they are not hairless. Orangatans have hair and they are living in a tropical climate. I don’t think it is imperative that they would have become less hairy.

  23. Riptor responds:

    Agreed, Mystery_Man, those are all good examples. But I read that our ancestors lost most of their body hair and facial hair because of global warming. That their bodies were hairy because of the harsh winters and the few ice ages they had to overcome.
    Agreed, primates, even those in hot climates, didn’t lose their hair, but we’re talking about humans.
    Primates didn’t start walking upright, but we did. They didn’t start building settlements, we did. And we have many more examples.
    We cant’ really compare our evolutionary progress to that of other species, even with species closest to us.

  24. mystery_man responds:

    Yes, we have evolved to walk upright and have developed civilization. But remember that Neandertals broke off from our evolutionary line 700,000 years ago. We evolved seperately from them, so I am not comparing us to them. I am saying that we evolved without thick body hair and perhaps they did not and there are examples of this in the animal kingdom. If we are not to compare them with us, then why say they would have lost their hair like us?

  25. mystery_man responds:

    There is certainly a possibility that they could have follwed a similar path of losing their hair, I’m just saying that with them following a seperate evolutionary route, this would not necessarily be the case. They would be considered a close relative, just like the apes and primates who turns out still have their hair.

  26. Riptor responds:

    Indeed. You might be right. That is certainly a strong possibility.
    I guess we’ll only know for sure if we, by some miracle, find any surviving Neanderthals nowadays.
    Until we do, we’ll never know for sure.

    But in any case, I stand corrected on a couple of points. Thanks for your insight Mystery_Man.

  27. gridbug responds:

    “Klingon masks!” *lol*

    Actually saw the first half of this episode last night… yes, the costumes were pretty lousy, but then again these creatures were supposed to be Neanderthals, not the regular sort of Giganto-inspired Bigfoot we’re most familiar with. Didn’t hold my interest. Time to re-watch Legend of Boggy Creek! 😀

  28. AxisboldAslove74 responds:

    I watched National Geogrpahic’s Alma special yesterday also and it was alright. Every cryptozoology related show tends to be so predictable though. There are never any new groundbreaking finds or any breakthroughs, just old facts and skeptics. Furthermore, I thought it was so unprofessional and almost a rude gesture that the cryptozoologist on the stakeout decided to get intoxicated on dutie. Its almost as if he wasn’t serious. What annoyed me though was how the cryptozoologist and civillian walked into the alleged Alma cave and investigated the inside. The cryptozoologist said it himself, you wouldn’t want the animal to pick up your scent and be aware of your pressence. With that information, honestly why would you investigate the cave first and scare whatevers living inside into not coming outside? IMO they should have staked out all night before investigating the cave so that something would actually feel confortable exiting the cave.

  29. panmankey responds:

    “Is It Real” just disappoints and disappoints. We should start blogging in real time during the show as a mean of venting.

    I think the biggest problem with these shows is their over-reliance on sending some unknown guy into the field in order to “find the creature.” It’s never interesting, and if they had found anything worthy of note we would have heard about it months ago. There is some very real history concerning the alma, and nearly all of it was overlooked to spend some time in a cave that no monster hunter with their salt would have even bothered with.

  30. Unknown Primate responds:

    Oh yeah, does the narrator on “Is It Real” always sound irritatingly smug, or is it just me?

  31. springheeledjack responds:

    Is it Real is really bugging me. They always set up these premises and try to make it look objective in the first 15-20 minutes and then do an about face for the rest of the program.

    I am sure one of the dudes behind that is one of the editors for Skeptic magazine. And I have been arguing with him in the Fortean Times over Champ and other lake critters.

    The show is definitely out to debunk crypto stuff, which doesn’t leave me with a good taste in my mouth for the National Geographic Channel either–they should at least keep bias out of the shows.

  32. mystery_man responds:

    These comments are really interesting, because living in Japan, I have never seen this show. Is it really that bad? Now I have to see it just to see how bad it is and decide if the voice is smug or not. haha

  33. springheeledjack responds:


    it’s not so awful as some, it’s just very contrived to set up some scenarios and “evidence” that they know they can debunk, and then put it out there and say, “well, look, I guess it is baloney afterall because we refuted everything with our people”–I am over simplifying, but it’s not objective.

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.