Turks = Mongoloid mix DNA shows

kuzzar

Originally posted by Aeoli All my arguments are at the links i provided. It is obvious what i mean with my statement "THE TURKS OF TÜRKİYE ARE OF 100% CENTRAL ASIAN TURK ORIGIN": Turks are direct descendants of ancient Central Asian Turks, Huns and Sakha's/Scythians. This is a figure from your source What I see with my blind eyes, is below In Saka period, people who lived in Kazakhstan, were not 100% same with people in ProtoTurks period  In Hun period, people who lived in Kazakhstan, were not 100% same with people in Saka period In Gokturk period, people who lived in Kazakhstan, were not 100% same with people in Hun period In Mongol period, people who lived in Kazakhstan, were not 100% same with people in Gokturk period

No, you did not understand the meaning of the figure. First of all, it is about the anthropological types found in the region of Kazakhstan. The ancestors of present day Türkiye Turks are the Huns, Sakha and Gök Türk. Proto Turks consisted of people with both West Eurasian and East Eurasian skull types, but the core of the Proto Turks had a West Eurasian origin. This core is able to be explained with an example of the tribe system of the Huns. The Oghurs, Acatziri, Kutrigur, etc. were the core/root of the Huns. Agathyrsi was for example also a core tribe of the Sakha's. These tribes were all of West Eurasian origin.

You can see that the Proto Turks in Kazakhstan were 100% of West Eurasian origin. But not to forget the fact that these Proto Turks were the same people with the Sumerians and the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of Europe. For example among the ancient samples of the same Linearbandkeramik culture is found the Y-DNA haplogroups C1(East Eurasian) and G2a(West Eurasian) together, they are both of the same nation and culture.

-Looking at the Sakha's in Kazakhstan, 85% of them belong to the West Eurasian craniometrical type.
-The Huns in Kazakhstan, belong 75% to the West Eurasian craniometrical type.
-The Turks in Kazakhstan, belong 50% to the West Eurasian craniometrical type.

If you had knowledge of the migrations the Huns conducted during the periods of Rua and Attila rule, you would have known the fact that the majority of the core of the Huns migrated to the Caucasian(around the Khazar/Caspian Sea and around the Black See) and Carpath Basin/Balkan regions.

Do you know were the centre of the Proto Bulgarians, Uz, Pecheneg, Kimak, Khazars, On-Ogurs was located before and after the migrations that were conducted during the periods of Rua and Attila? First enlighten yourself with these data. Also, do you know to which locations the majority of the core of the Mongol and Turkmen tribes between the 11th and 14th centuries made migrations? Enlighten yourself with the history of the Ilkhanid Khanate between Türkiye and Iran, the Golden Horde Khanate around the borders of the Black Sea region.

The reason for the dropping of the West Eurasian frequency in the from 100% to 30% is because of the major migrations the Sakha, Hun and Turk tribes made to most West Eurasian regions. And the Proto Turks were obviously one Turk nation with people of both West and East Eurasian origin, but the core was of West Eurasian origin. This structure is 100% the same as the structure in the Turks of Türkiye and the Turks of Central Asia, Caucasia, Carpath Basin, Russian regions, Iran, Azerbaijan, etcetera. Also, Central Asia is not restricted to only Kazakhstan.

Originally posted by Aeoli If you want to talk about Y-DNA, just check wiki to see how different Turks in Anatolia from Central Asian Brothers Kazaks (66,7% haplogroup C), Kırghız (63,5% R1a)  http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%BCrklerin_genetik_tarihi (Turkish source, but you will just check the table) An advise, do an autosomal dna test and learn who much Central Asian you are? Mine is 6%

First of all, i want to ask friendly a simple question, which Y-DNA haplogroups found among the Turks in Türkiye, do you think are not of Turk and Central Asian origin?

Do you know that among the Argyn tribe of the Kazakhs, haplogroup G1 was found with 87%? Did you know that there was found R1b among the Kyrgyz with a frequency of higher than 50%?

Seriously tell me, which haplogroups found among the restricted studies about the Turks of Türkiye are not of ancient Turk origin and are not found among the Central Asian and other region Turks?

Originally posted by kuzzar All my arguments are at the links i provided. It is obvious what i mean with my statement "THE TURKS OF TÜRKİYE ARE OF 100% CENTRAL ASIAN TURK ORIGIN": Turks are direct descendants of ancient Central Asian Turks, Huns and Sakha's/Scythians.

Originally posted by J.A.W. Seems extremely unlikely - given the extent & longevity of the Ottoman empire.. With Constantinople being the ancient capital/hub of Eastern European/Western Asian civilisation, & for so long a melting-pot of the ethnicities, a situation carried on by the Ottomans.. The over-riding Islamic dogma subsumed ethnic distinctions like-wise..

At the Ottoman Archives, a complete database with the ethnic origin of all families(Turk or not Turk, Muslim or not Muslim) who were living in the region of present day Türkiye is available. Every Turk in Türkiye can trace his family line with these archive documents. The same methods counts for other country archives. We must realize that if we dont value historical documents, it means we are not seeking for the truth, and it also means that there is no such thing as history at all. There is no such thing as a melting-pot, everyone knows their roots, and the Selcukids and Ottomans did not even assimilate one population, in stead an important part of the Turks have been assimilated. All of this could easily be seen from historical documents. And please stop with the obvious tactic of calling Türkiye a meltingpot. Why do people like yourself not even mention the fact that many present day Jews are of Turk origin, descended from the Khazars? Who are the most ancient people of Anatolia and Mezopotamia? What was the origin of the language the Sumerians did talk? Why never question these fundamental points? You people always have the same strategy, same keywords, i personally find this very pathetic. Why, is Türkiye a meltingpot? What are historical or genetic arguments for this?

Originally posted by Aeoli You also need it too, I am waiting your sources

Forgive me for asking, are you blind?

Turk Nation: Anthropology-Archaeology-Genetic-Haplogroups
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=229&t=12267

Antik DNA
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewforum.php?f=229

Tarihi Mezarlarda Bulunan Haplogrupların Ülkeler Listesi
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=229&t=12209

Tarihi Mezarlarda Bulunan Y-DNA'lerin, MT-DNA Kombinasyonu
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=229&t=12210

Originally posted by Aeoli You can get nothing with this language. Avoid personal attacks, focus on arguments, theories, sources

All arguments are at those links. My statement is clear: "TURKS FROM TÜRKİYE ARE 100% OF TURK ETHNIC ORIGIN!". I just want to see a counter reaction to my statement, in which he/she(or someone else) explains why they think Turks of Türkiye are not of Turk origin. Then i will provide all my arguments one by one, show you how wrong you are.

Look at the messages of "ButlerKing", at the following link: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/37808-Crimean-Tatars-are-not-Turkic-but-an-mixture-of-many-settlement-from-Europe-to-Asia?s=a77c43faad64182258c73b2f7e7705ff.

Look how irrational and non logical his statements are. It is obvious he is a troll.

Originally posted by Aeoli Sorry but I am using my logic, investigate the scientific sources, create my own database and still I can't see your point. Maybe you should explain "THE TURKS OF TÜRKİYE ARE OF 100% CENTRAL ASIAN TURK ORIGIN" before start to proof it. Who are the Turks of Turkey?  all 75 million or 55-60 million(-kurds from all population )??? What do you mean by 100% Central Asian Turk Origin? Autosomal DNA, YDNA or Mt-DNA???

All my arguments are at the links i provided. It is obvious what i mean with my statement "THE TURKS OF TÜRKİYE ARE OF 100% CENTRAL ASIAN TURK ORIGIN": Turks are direct descendants of ancient Central Asian Turks, Huns and Sakha's/Scythians.

And i am asking you, based on which Y-DNA haplogroups, do you think that the modern Turks of Türkiye, are not of Central Asian Turk origin?


Edited by kuzzar - 13-Jun-2015 at 19:59

LOOK AT THE PORTRAITS PAINTED BY ANCIENT ARTISTS, OF OUR ANCESTOR ATTILA. IT IS OBVIOUSLY OF WEST EURASIAN TURK ORIGIN.





















Edited by kuzzar - 13-Jun-2015 at 08:47

Mertegin, go easy my friend.

A heap of bullshits.. First of all everyone has to know there is no such a thing "Pureblood" for any nation/race since all the people in the world are not horses or dogs . Afterall The Turks have Turk(Turkic) genes for sure. Maybe some have less some have more.. moreover as the science world says , geography affects the type.. Although The khagans had no Mongoloid eyes... Here is Yabgu(general-brother of Bilge Khagan)Kultegin 

Edited by Mertegin - 09-Jun-2015 at 10:13

TURKS FROM TÜRKİYE ARE 100% OF TURK ETHNIC ORIGIN! I AM READY FOR A INTENSIVE DISCUSSION BASED ON SCIENTIFIC FACTS.

Turk Nation: Anthropology-Archaeology-Genetic-Haplogroups
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=229&t=12267

Antik DNA
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewforum.php?f=229

Tarihi Mezarlarda Bulunan Haplogrupların Ülkeler Listesi
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=229&t=12209

Tarihi Mezarlarda Bulunan Y-DNA'lerin, MT-DNA Kombinasyonu
http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=229&t=12210

Edited by kuzzar - 13-Jun-2015 at 19:56

Originally posted by Ollios Originally posted by Attis of Anatolia who are we? islamized Anatolians i believe :D and Who is Anatolian? Even Phyrgians or Hittites were foreign

And what exactly "foreign" means? If you go enough far back in time, we all came from Africa, so we are all foreign. We have to set time parameters and agree on how back in time we are willing to go for the needs of this thread.

However, with Turkish DNA being like
"... E1b1b1 = 10.7% (common in the Mediterranean region)
G = 10.9% (common in the Caucasus, also found in the Middle East)
I = 5.3% (common in Central Europe, the Western Caucasus, and the Balkans)
J1 = 9% (common in Arabia and Daghestan)
J2 = 24% (common in Western Asia and Southeastern Europe and also found in Central and South Asia)
K = 4.5% (common in Asia and the Caucasus)
L = 4.2% (common in India and Khorasan)
N = 3.8% (common in Eastern Europe and North Asia, including Siberia [e.g. Turkic-speaking Yakuts], the Altai Mountains region, and the Ural Mountains region - the article however did not consider N to come to Turkey's Turks from North Asia)
Q = 1.9% (common in North Asia including Northern Altaic peoples)
R1a = 6.9% (common in Central Asia, the Caucasus, Eastern Europe, and among Indo-Aryans)
R1b = 14.7% (common in Western Europe)
T = 2.5% (common in the Mediterranean, South Asia, and Northeastern Africa..." http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/anatolian-turks.html

I would opt for the vague phrase "Anatolian" as a not-bad-choice word choice for a meaning of the sort of "common Mediterranean genetic substrata dating from the Paleolithic".

Edited by Don Quixote - 31-May-2014 at 03:51