Where did proto Indo Iranian speakers ancestry orignate

[Fire Haired]

http://ukrmap.su/program2010/wh6/1_files/image056.jpghttp://ukrmap.su/program2009/uh7/7_02/73.jpg

over 2,000 year old gold depicting Indo Iranian speaking sycthians in central asia. In most ancient art depicting them they have simple clothing that coveres their arms and legs, long hair, and huge beards and uselly doing something with horses. Horse's and chariots were extremely important to Indo Iranian culture.
http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Images2/Scythian/Scythian_Priest_Warriors.gif

3,000 year old mummy of a Indo Iranian speaker in tarium basin of China 6 feet 6 inches tall brown hair and red facial hair. He is named Charchen man he was buried with his 1 year old son who had brown hair and a woman who was probably his wife she also had brown hair. On bottom is 3,000 year old Indo Iranian mummy of a woman with same style of clothing similar hair style and blonde hair.
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT3JGoW_RDEZbl-BldCUf18MKMLlCn4ClajLH6Ri4Y5lyu695C7jghttp://www.meshrep.com/PicOfDay/mummies/goldilocks1.jpg
2,400 year old paintg of a Sycthian horseman in the Atlai mountains near Mongolia where there had been Indo Iranian settlment for over 4,000 years.
http://middle-earth.xenite.org/files/2012/08/scythian-warrior-01.jpg


Indo Iranian (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIndo-Iranian_languages&ei=uGMNUoy_GYn2qQHJ8YHAAw&usg=AFQjCNEjivmBbuBpErAymLV4YbmDH6a6Zw&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) is a branch of the Indo European language family tree (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIndo-European_languages&ei=SGQNUqLoKoTirQHzpYDwAw&usg=AFQjCNH4ljJrFaKQ6pkZqj9zDxCT_y1PXg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) they also have their own branch of R1a (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Feurope%2FHaplog roup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml&ei=XmQNUvTEOcemqQGjqoGoCQ&usg=AFQjCNGvGBs48XCYIHX9cAdy7WteeOw5Lw&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) which is R1a1a1b2 Z93. Based on the fact their R1a1a1b2 is the brother of Balto Slavic (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBalto-Slavic_languages&ei=jmQNUqbjNYnjrAHPuYCIBA&usg=AFQjCNFNKjIgFdjI5to8Gaj7DaCaF77xsg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) R1a1a1b1 Z280 and that proto Balto Slavic speaking Corded war culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCorded_ Ware_culture&ei=r2QNUpT-EYjqqAHl94GYBQ&usg=AFQjCNG8a_yp5nZRFuoQQMXp3bhNuofzOw&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) and proto Indo Iranian speaking Abashevo culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAbashev o_culture&ei=yWQNUs6KOcefrAGyhIDQDw&usg=AFQjCNFWRl_JjtoHnzVVnbeKnv68KBbrAQ&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) and sintashta culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSintash ta_culture&ei=BWUNUrX1G8OqqQGo1oGACA&usg=AFQjCNE5UwgrXIqIYbfZOnazekbu0OG_Jg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM). All originated in Yamna culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FYamna_c ulture&ei=HlsNUua5FsjFqgGo4oHAAw&usg=AFQjCNHb6Rh3o3cAWFpKHCAPoWXk2Xd4rQ&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) could mean Indo Iranian and Balto Slavic form their own branch together. All we can say for sure is that proto Indo Iranian speakers branched out of Yamna culture which took up alot of central Russia, Ukraine, and parts of Kazakhstan.

map of Yamna culture
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_8EwUM_Y6rrMlaYWhBl4OtX0eOm0qe FzjZDwDpy5wcgzVqH-s

They started migrating out of Yamana culture east into central Asia starting at the very earliest 5,000ybp. They formed into abashevo and sintashta cultures in central Asia between 5,000-4,000ybp. The Indo Iranians spread in alot of areas in central asia from 5,000-3,400ybp. They had land all around the Caspian sea, south Siberia, west China, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, Iran they were they had more land than any ethnic group in the world at that time.


Here is a map of the migration of proto Indo European (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FProto-Indo-European_language&ei=t2UNUo36KZS7qQGRqYHgDA&usg=AFQjCNE6Cogc3PPdBeU7yhGOrFtwuDXqPA&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) R1a1a1 M417

this does not mean R1a1a1 M417 is the only proto Indo European haplogroup or that all Indo European languages spread with mainly this haplogroup. This was made by Eupedia and is based on all the info we have so far from ancient DNA, modern DNA, and Archaeology. It also shows how Indo Iranian's migrated starting with R1a1a1b2 Z93.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1a_migration_map.jpg

Family tree of Y DNA R1a. INdo European R1a starts at R1a1a1 M417. R1a1a1b2 Z93 is the Indo Iranian branch.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1a-tree.gif

The proto Indo Iranians ancestry orignally was from around Russia and Ukriane that is all we know. They may have been descended of very early Indo European speakers possibly the first in Dnieper Donets culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDnieper %25E2%2580%2593Donets_culture&ei=92UNUuDVH6HY2wXyu4GQAw&usg=AFQjCNGHGlSm96sLF7ES8u53COsBOW7lhw&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) around Ukraine 7,000-8,000ybp. Or their ancestors were conquered by the earliest Indo European speakers and most of their ancestry came from non Indo European hunter gathers or farmers in Russia. '

Here are full DNA results from ancient Indo Iranians
I did not count Mongliod groups in the mtDNA because they lived around Mongliods for 3,000 years it was probably from inter marriage. They defintley did already had some Mongliod groups before migrating to central asia since 7,000 year old mtDNA from very early Indo European Dneiper Donets culture had some Mongliod groups.

mtDNA 78 samples


U=25 32.05%(U5=12 15.4%,(U5a=11 14%(U5a1=7 9%), U2=4 5.1%(U2e=3 3.8%(U2e1=1 1.3%), U4=3 3.85% U7=1 1.3%, U1=1 1.3%)


H=16 20.5%(H6=1 1.3%, H5=1 1.2%, H2a1=1 1.2%)


T=15 19.2%(T1=8 10.3%(T1a=2 2.6%), T3=3 3.8%, T2=2 2.6%(T2a1b1=1 1.2%)


HV=6 7.7%(HV2=2 2.6%,HV6=1 1.3%)


K=5 6.4%(K2b=1 1.3%)


I=4 5.1%(I3=2 2.6%, I4=1 1.6%J=3 3.8%(


J1=2 2.6%


H or U=3 3.8%U5 or J=1 1.3%

Y DNA samples 17


R1a1a=16, C=1


Hair color samples=10 i did not count Tarium mummies because they have east asian mtDNA they where a mix of European and east Asian and had black hair no Europeans have black hair only dark Brown most west Eurasians don't have black hair there is no way the black hair came from Indo Iranians the only sample to have dark brown hair also had east Asian Y DNA C so i did not count him either he was not consistent with other Indo Iranian remains i know that there are 3,400 and 3,000ybp tarium mummies with red hair but i did not count them because there are many more Tarium mummies where they know the hair color but the ones with red hair make the news so i don't think it is accurate if i only count the redhead ones but i need to say red hair did exist in Indo Iranians


Indo Iranian hair color 10 samples


light brown/blonde=6 60%, Brown=4 40%


Eye color samples=20


blue/green eyes=15 75%, Brown eyes=5 25%


So what ancient DNA tell's us is they were mainly light brown- blonde haired and mainly blue and green eyed. The only area's who find such high percentages is Scandinavia, Baltic sea area, and northwestern Russia. Also that they had at least 3% red hair the tarium mummie's prove it but also Sycthians in ancient Greeks writting were described as red haired. Also red hair sometimes pop's up in modern Indo Iranian speaking ethnic groups in Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and in west china were there used to be Indo Iranians who were conquered by Turkic speakers.

So this is my estimate on what hair color and eye color proto Indo Iranian speakers had 40-60% light brown- blonde hair, 45-50% brown hair, and 3-15% red hair. 60-70% non brown eyes and the rest brown. The only area in Europe beside's western Europe that has over 1% red hair is in volga Russia. The Udmurts have the highest in the world 15-20% and ethnic groups around them have at least 1% so that might give an idea of were the proto Indo Iranian speakers ancestry came from.

Here is a map of red hair made by Eupedia. Focus on the red hair in Russia that is probably around the area proto Indo Iranians ancestry came from. So kind of at the eastern border of Europe and pretty far north.
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSnHloGD_uGCnvumuvW6gHTzeGadiJ8b D_AIxSfs-RDQaETToNK

On the top is a map of light eyes which the proto Indo Iranian speakers were probably around 50-70% and o the bottom a map of light hair which proto Indo Iranian speakers were around 40-60%.
http://www.summagallicana.it/lessico/c/Coon%20Light_Eyes_Map.JPG
http://robertlindsay.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/blond_hair_map1.jpg

This is now kind of confusing the area of red hair (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Fgenetics%2Forig ins_of_red_hair.shtml&ei=OWANUq6aH4zyqwGpyIGwCg&usg=AFQjCNEP1vrHeoa6NjY8zkDGe4ZGqrCHfg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWM) in central Russia makes it seem that could be were proto Indo Iranians speakers ancestry originated. Those area's though have alot less light hair and eye's than early Indo Iranian remains. Just going off hair color and eye color my guess is their ancestry is from around Volga Russia or northern Russia also at the eastern border of Europe. So they probably were in the far northern and eastern border of Yamna culture. Which also probably means since Yamna culture and it's father Dnieper Donets culture orignated around Ukriane and russia but not central or northern Russia that proto Indo iranian's ancestors were conquered by R1a1a1b Indo Europeans probably 5,000-5,500ybp. So when they migrated out of Russia to central asia 5,000-4,000ybp they would have been people just conquered by Yamna R1a1a1b people.

All we know from the Y DNA is they were pretty much all R1a1a they did not test for the Indo Iranian branch R1a1a1b2 but there is almost no doubt they had it. Pretty much all Indo European speakers today have over 30% Y DNA of Indo European origin but that does not tell their full ancestry. When Indo Europeans conquered people they killed the native men in battle so they killed off alot of the native Y DNA and replaced it with their own by becoming the high ranking people in the society forcing as many women as they want to be their wives or prostitates. The ancestry of people conquered by Indo Europeans mainly comes from the native people and the mtDNA mainly stays the same. So the mtDNA of ancient Indo Iranian remains in my opinion is the best way beside's hair color and eye color to find where they originally came from.

One thing that surprised me is they had so much T1 a total of 10.3% of their mtDNA. From over 1,500 mtDNA samples in Neolithic to Iron age Europe it is extremely extremely extremely rare to find a T1 almost all T was T2 and the fact they had 10.3% is very surprising. I could not really find any info on T1 if anyone has any info please post it. I did look at mtDNA of Udmurts and other non Slavic ethnic groups around Volga Russia the Udmurts had over 10% T1 and T1 was much more popular than in the rest of Europe. So i guess that is even more evidence proto Indo Iranian speakers originated central to northern Russia.

Conclsuion
This is what i think the ethnic origin of the proto Indo Iranian speakers is. They descend from a mix of invading Indo European Y DNA R1a1a1b people from more southern Russia apart of Yamna culture and hunter gathers in Volga Russia and northern Russia. This mix would have happened about 5,000ybp right about the time they started to migrate to central Asia. The Y DNA of their hunter gather ancestors was probably hg I maybe I2a1b or I1a they also may have been originally Uralic speakers so that would mean they had alot of N1c. I know that there is about 15-20% I2a1b in Indo Iranian kurdish people of Iraq, Syria, and Iran but that may have come from later cimmerian invasions around 2,600ybp Cimmermans came from around the black sea where I2a1b is very popular. I dont know if there is any trace of I1, I2a1b, or N1c with the spread of Indo Iranian languages. This could mean the first speakers were almost completely R1a1a1b2.

Area i think proto Indo Iranian speakers ancestry came from
3709137092

[Fire Haired]

I know the word Indo Iranian is confusing it is a language it does not exact define someone genetically. I am only talking about the origin of the very first Indo Iranian speakers not all people who speak the language. Some Indo Iranian speakers in Mongolia, Siberia, and China from 4,000-1,600ybp were a mix of east asian and what the first Indo iranian speakers where. U can see on the R1a migration route Indo Iranians had also migrated south from around the Caspien sea starting around 4,000ybp towards Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and iNdia. It seems that for hundreds of years they mixed with the more urban civilizations around that area they probably mixed with the people too. They would have adopted alot of cultral stuff from the people they traded with they eventulley made migrations there and two seperate Indo iranian speaking groups conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

The people who wrote parts of the Rig veda 3,500ybp had became really urbanized and changed alot culturally from earlier Indo Iranians. They conquered the native Indus valley civilization and made themselves the high ranking people the caste system probably already existed just they made themselves the high ranking people. Brahmans and other high caste members in India are suppose to be direct descendants of those people who invaded India which makes sense since so far Brahmans tested have 75% R1a1a1b2 Z93.

The reason Brahmins dont look like early Indo Iranian remains is probably because when they arrived in the Indus valley they had mixed with people in that area already and if they did not they would have very quickly and blended in. The Indo iranian's who migrated to Iran around the same time 3,500ybp descended from Adronovo culture just like the Sycthin's in central Asia but now Sycthinas are extinct. Also Kurdish and all other Indo Iranians west of Iran come from that migration.

I dont want people to get confused language does not tell ur full ancestry. Like for example Finnish people speak a urlaic language but the orignal Uralic speakers were Mongliod from Siberia who migrated and conquered that area 7,000-8,000ybp. That does not not make finnish people Mongliod.

[Anglojew]

I know the word Indo Iranian is confusing it is a language it does not exact define someone genetically. I am only talking about the origin of the very first Indo Iranian speakers not all people who speak the language. Some Indo Iranian speakers in Mongolia, Siberia, and China from 4,000-1,600ybp were a mix of east asian and what the first Indo iranian speakers where. U can see on the R1a migration route Indo Iranians had also migrated south from around the Caspien sea starting around 4,000ybp towards Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and iNdia. It seems that for hundreds of years they mixed with the more urban civilizations around that area they probably mixed with the people too. They would have adopted alot of cultral stuff from the people they traded with they eventulley made migrations there and two seperate Indo iranian speaking groups conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

The people who wrote parts of the Rig veda 3,500ybp had became really urbanized and changed alot culturally from earlier Indo Iranians. They conquered the native Indus valley civilization and made themselves the high ranking people the caste system probably already existed just they made themselves the high ranking people. Brahmans and other high caste members in India are suppose to be direct descendants of those people who invaded India which makes sense since so far Brahmans tested have 75% R1a1a1b2 Z93.

The reason Brahmins dont look like early Indo Iranian remains is probably because when they arrived in the Indus valley they had mixed with people in that area already and if they did not they would have very quickly and blended in. The Indo iranian's who migrated to Iran around the same time 3,500ybp descended from Adronovo culture just like the Sycthin's in central Asia but now Sycthinas are extinct. Also Kurdish and all other Indo Iranians west of Iran come from that migration.

I dont want people to get confused language does not tell ur full ancestry. Like for example Finnish people speak a urlaic language but the orignal Uralic speakers were Mongliod from Siberia who migrated and conquered that area 7,000-8,000ybp. That does not not make finnish people Mongliod.


Does this account for Genghis Khan and his family be redheaded and blue-eyed?

[rashka]

It is said in the history books that they originated north of the Black Sea.

[Smeagol]

Yes, north of the Black Sea in Ukraine.

[Smeagol]

Does this account for Genghis Khan and his family be redheaded and blue-eyed?

Probably.

[Smeagol]

the orignal Uralic speakers were Mongliod from Siberia who migrated and conquered that area 7,000-8,000ybp.

No they weren't, they were Caucasoids from west of the Urals.

[Peikko]

Fire haired makes weird threads. I'm quite sure he's really iranian.

[Fire Haired]

http://www.biography.com/imported/images/Biography/Images/Profiles/K/Genghis-Khan-WC-9308634-1-402.jpg

Genghis Kahn was not red haired and blue eyed. It is true that Indo Iranian speakers who had around 3-15% red hair were one of the bigest ethnic group in all of central asia from 4,000-1,600ybp. Also they did have contact with Mongols, Turks, and other east asian people around China for over 4,000 years. This does not mean everyone who had contact with them in central asia was a redhead. The Indo iranian tribes in asia were eventulley conquered by east asian Turkic and Mongol tribes from 400-1000ad. Today u find almost no redheads or European looking people period in those areas of asia but alot of their R1a1a1b2 Z92 Y DNA is still left. I think u already know Indo Iranian language is still all over the place in pretty much all land from India to Iran and even the kurds a huge ethnic group in Iraq, Turkey, and Syria.

[Fire Haired]

No they weren't, they were Caucasoids from west of the Urals.

what evidence do u have Y DNA N1c which totally repsents Uralic languages in Europe is in the Mongliod Y DNA family. It is the brother to O which domintes east asia. Also how do u explain Uralic speakers in northern Siberia who are completly east asian they have N1b.

sure the language may have started west of the urals in europe but by east asian people.

The Kunda culture which spread acroos alot of northeast Europe is suspected to be were Urlaic languages in Europe came from. Kunda started about 7,000ybp. Compare it to the map of N1c in Europe.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-N.gifhttp://www.eupedia.com/images/content/old_neolithic_map.gif

[Smeagol]

what evidence do u have Y DNA N1c which totally repsents Uralic languages in Europe is in the Mongliod Y DNA family.It is the brother to O which domintes east asia.

N1c is not Mongoloid. It occurs mainly in Baltic people, and Finns.


Also how do u explain Uralic speakers in northern Siberia who are completly east asian they have N1b.

They aren't, they have Caucasoid admixture.


sure the language may have started west of the urals in europe but by east asian people.

There were no East Asian people native to Europe, how do you explain the fact that all the early Finno-Ugric crania are Caucasoid?

[Fire Haired]

N1c is not Mongoloid. It occurs mainly in Baltic people, and Finns.

R1b is most popular in western Europe but has been there for only 5,000 years. Were a haplogroup is most popular does not mean it originated there. U really need to study this there is mongliopd admixture in finnish in globe13 test of aust DNA Finnish have 5.6% siberian and 1,2% artic. Here are some examples of non uralic europeans french have 0% suberian and 0.2% artic, Swedish 0.3% siberian and 0.9% artic, Portugese 0.2% siberian 0% artic.

It does not matter N is the freaking brother of O the most popular Y DNA haplogroup of east asia. I have looked at the whole human y DNA family tree and there is no way N was orignally Caucasin or anything but Mongliod also it exists at higher rates in northern Siberia than anywhere in Europe. R the grandfather of R1b and R1a was also orignally mongliod but over thousends of years it was bounced around and eventulley ended up in the area of Indo European languages origin became R1a1a1 M417 and i guess R1b L23. Just saying ur Y DNA haplogroup tells very little about ur ancestry only ur direct male lineage think about it u can be 100% chinese and have Y DNA I1 because 10,000ybp or something like that somehow there was european inter marriage in china it does not make u european though.

I hope u get the point Finnish and other Uralic speaking european people have alot more mongliod admixture than other Europeans.

Look at this sami man he looks very east asian. Sami live in the northern most areas of Scandnavia and speak a extremly related language to Finnish so it is Urlaic.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSy73TqNsIh7hmlE7N_8khubyBppnYVj o51bnU1ph7Q4MhvjmhyaA

u should read this it is about the history of siberian gene flow in northeast europe
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plosgenetics.org%2Fdoi%2Fpgen .1003296&ei=w6IOUrLmOOSQyAGR6IE4&usg=AFQjCNGPlOaAvqVrVAu914Q3MffKTwBXPQ&sig2=v5v_Hi2inRZtY7Vmoh2RPw&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWc





They aren't, they have Caucasoid admixture.

where are u getting the info they have caucasiod admicture




There were no East Asian people native to Europe, how do you explain the fact that all the early Finno-Ugric crania are Caucasoid?

i never said they were native to europe what i am saying is they migrated to europe.

[Smeagol]

R1b is most popular in western Europe but has been there for only 5,000 years. Were a haplogroup is most popular does not mean it originated there. U really need to study this there is mongliopd admixture in finnish in globe13 test of aust DNA Finnish have 5.6% siberian and 1,2% artic. Here are some examples of non uralic europeans french have 0% suberian and 0.2% artic, Swedish 0.3% siberian and 0.9% artic, Portugese 0.2% siberian 0% artic.

It does not matter N is the freaking brother of O the most popular Y DNA haplogroup of east asia. I have looked at the whole human y DNA family tree and there is no way N was orignally Caucasin or anything but Mongliod also it exists at higher rates in northern Siberia than anywhere in Europe. R the grandfather of R1b and R1a was also orignally mongliod but over thousends of years it was bounced around and eventulley ended up in the area of Indo European languages origin became R1a1a1 M417 and i guess R1b L23. Just saying ur Y DNA haplogroup tells very little about ur ancestry only ur direct male lineage think about it u can be 100% chinese and have Y DNA I1 because 10,000ybp or something like that somehow there was european inter marriage in china it does not make u european though.


Even if what you say is true, what makes you think the original Finno-Ugrics didn't look like modern Finno-Ugrics who have haplogroup N today? Why is all the ancient Finno-Ugric crania Caucasoid?

''The evidence for the racial composition of the early Finns is scanty, but incapable of misinterpretation. One small series of ten skulls dating from about the sixth century B.C., contemporaneous with the Early Scythian period, has been identified with the ancestors of the Volga Finns at the time of their unity.4 (See Appendix 1, cot. 49.) These come from the cemeteries of Polianki and Maklacheievka, from the former Viatka government in Permian Finn country just south of the present Komi or Zyryenian Republic. The graves belonged to the so-called Anan'ino cultural horizon. This Anan'ino culture5 was formed from a combination of influences from Siberia, the Caucasus, Scythia, and Scandinavia. It did not end suddenly, but passed by a gradual process of evolution into the civilization of the historic Volga Finns. Therefore, we may consider these skulls, few as they are, to represent the ancestors of the Finns before the beginning of their historic expansion.

This small group of seven male and three female crania is not completely homogeneous, but it is nearly so. All of the skulls are European in racial type. The faces are a little broader than in most Mediterranean groups, but not to an exceptional degree. The noses, with the exception of one extremely leptorrhine male, are mesorrhine or chamaerrhine; but so are those of many early Danubians. The cranial form is mesocephalic or dolichocephalic, with one male reaching the figure of 83; the vault is moderately high; the forehead usually straight, the browridges moderate.

There is nothing new about these crania, and nothing specifically mongoloid. They closely resemble another small series of eight male skulls from the cemetery of Polom in the same district as the Anan'ino cemeteries6 (see Appendix I, cot. 50), dating from the ninth century A.D., and known to have been those of Finns of the Permian sub-family. In view of the small numbers, no difference can be found which would be statistically valid. A third group from the Lower Volga, representing the Mordvins of the fourteenth century, is similar to the Anan'ino and Permian crania, except that it is extremely long headed, with low indices, centered about the range from 71 to 73.

When we make a metrical comparison between the first two groups of Finnish skulls and all European series previously studied, the find that they fit into the ranks of Iron Age Indo-European speakers without difficulty. On the whole, they resemble most nearly the larger-sized members of the intermediate group; they also resemble the Scythian crania to a considerable extent, and even more the Minussinsk skulls. They arc slightly smaller than the Germanic type, but equal to it in vault height and face breadth. In nose form and cranial height, they resemble the Neolithic Danubians.

News of the racial position of these early Finnish skulls will come as a surprise to scholars who see in the Finns a group of mongoloid immigrants from Asia. But that they were essentially if not wholly European is, despite the paucity of Debetz's material, incontestable. Nor can one derive these Finns from forest-dwellers of Mesolithic tradition, except perhaps as a minor influence. Furthermore, in the early Anan'ino series, recognizable Corded peculiarities are to he found in but one male skull out of seven. The Finno-Ugrians, therefore, may be tentatively considered to have been, in the period before they expanded into their historic scats, Europeans of mixed origin, basically Danubian in type, with some brachycephalic ele ment and an extremely long-headed variation as well; the latter is already familiar to us in the form of the Corded type; the former is not clearly definable, but is European. Its only discernible difference from the others in the same series is in a greater breadth of the skull. This broad-headed element is completely lacking in the late lower Volga group, of which we have only the cranial indices.

Debetz's discovery that the Finno-Ugrian speakers were originally purely European in race, and furthermore, not local Palaeolithic or Mesolithic survivors, is in perfect accord with the present state of linguistic knowledge, which makes their form of speech one of two equally weighted elements in the basic Indo-European. They not only were, but on logical grounds must have been, in the larger sense, Mediterraneans.''-Carleton Coon


I hope u get the point Finnish and other Uralic speaking european people have alot more mongliod admixture than other Europeans.

Finns, have 6.8%, Baltic Finns have barely any, Komi have about 22%.


Look at this sami man he looks very east asian.

You're cherrypicking, most Saami don't look like that. The Saami only have 6% Mongoloid genes. He doesn't look pure East Asian anyway. He looks mixed with Samoyeds.


where are u getting the info they have caucasiod admicture

Due to the fact that they (Khanty, and Mansi) have many Caucasoid looking people.
http://www.etnia.fi/en/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/А21.jpg


i never said they were native to europe what i am saying is they migrated to europe.

But all the early Finno-Ugric crania is Caucasoid.

[Fire Haired]

Horaito i was cherry picking in no way was i saying that is the average sami. I was trying to show there is real east asian admixture in them. U know they said those skull's are from 6 century bc just 2,6000ybp Kunda culture ws in finland 7,000-8,000ybp of course by that tieme the Mongliod Uralic's had blended in it proves nothing. people in Finland have always been Caucasin but that does not mean there was a Mongliod migration which brought Uralic languages and Y DNA N1c.

Those people with the skull shape stuff in my opinon more than 75% of it is total BS. There is no such thing as the Germanic kull shape DNA tells people's ancestry and Germans are not a race, They are a mix of many people who settled that area over 10,000's of years. Also there is no such things as the meditreaen race i think it is based on stero types about the ancient meditreaen world just because theyw ere connected cultrally does not mean they were genetically. Also Greeks and Italians the only ancestry they share with each other is they have much more mid eastern than other Europeans their European side's are unrelated. People on the European side of the meditreaen are European greeks and Italians like i said before not that related probably same with Spainish and Italian. So i really really really doubt there is a meditreaen skull type since med people are not close relatives to each other.

Something about Baltic's the reason the have so much N1c but dont speak a Urlaic language. Is till 5,000ybp they were apart of Uralic cultures like Kunda then conquered by proto Balto Slavic speaking Corded ware culture.

[Fire Haired]

sure maybe the first uralic speakers in finalnd 7,000ybp or whatever were caucasin but no matter how u put it the very first were Mongliod. Which is why N is so popular in Uralic speakers and why they have more Mongliod in aust DNA than most Europeans.

[Peikko]

sure maybe the first uralic speakers in finalnd 7,000ybp or whatever were caucasin but no matter how u put it the very first were Mongliod. Which is why N is so popular in Uralic speakers and why they have more Mongliod in aust DNA than most Europeans.

According to my understanding, there was human habitation in this region before the Uralic language group even developed.

I think the N-haplogroup predates the Mongoloid race, so I don't see how the first N-people could have been mongs. With this logic R1 is African haplogroup.

Anyway, I'm definitely whiter than you :cool:

[Fire Haired]

According to my understanding, there was human habitation in this region before the Uralic language group even developed.

Of course there was Uralic languages came to Finland from Kunda culture which started about 7,000-8,000ybp. I am pretty sure their are human remains in Finland that are older than that. The vast majority of Finnish ancestry is from pre Kunda culture pre Uralic people in Finland.


I think the N-haplogroup predates the Mongoloid race, so I don't see how the first N-people could have been mongs. With this logic R1 is African haplogroup.

If u look at the Human Y DNA family tree there is no way that is true. click here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup) to see it. It is kind of hard to explain but seriously no way is that true. Y DNA N was orignally Mongliod there is no doubt and it was most brought over to Finland by Caucasians with Mongliod mixture or Mongliods. That defintley can explain why they have such little mid eastern in aust dna compared to other Europeans but much more Mongliod. The Uralic languages defintley started with Mongliod people they spread the language with Caucasians near them then quickly most were Caucasian but that still does not take away the fact the first were not.

I think u need to study more on Human Y DNA.




Anyway, I'm definitely whiter than you :cool:

If u are talking about skin color i am about as white as naturally possible. Redheads are the palest people on earth. It is true Finnish people and northern Scandinavians have the most European blood. U guys are the closest relatives in DNA of 7,000 year old hunter gather from north Spain and two 5,000 year old hunter gathers in south Swedan. It is hard to explain it all but ur main ancestors would have migrated to Scandinavia from central Europe with Y DNA I1a first about 11,000ybp. At that time all Europeans were 100% European and stone age hunter gathers they were genetically isolated since probably 30,000ybp. Just like Native Americans were till Europeans came. They probably made it to Finland very quickly by 9,000ybp and would have already formed into I1a2.

Then they were invaded by Uralic speakers east of them who brought Y DNA N1c, Uralic language, and some Mongliod blood since the first Uralic speakers were Mongliod. After that Finnish stayed pretty isolated from other Europeans. From 10,000-6,000ybp there was an invasion of farmers from the mid east who brough mainly Y DNA G2a, also E1b1b V13, and maybe some J1 and J2. I dont know if u understand aust DNA we have some samples from Neolithic European farmers it shows they brough the group the globe13 test calls meditreaen, southwest asian, and west asian. Finnish were barelly effected by these migration maybe southern Finnish were alittle bit.

Farming never really became popular in Scandinavia period till 5,000-3,000ybp i am not sure but i think some stayed as hunter gathers till the middle ages but they probably had contact with Germanic Scandinavians by that time and learned some things. So unlike southern and central Norwegian and Swedish Finnish kept only European blood with some Mongliod. There was some Indo European settlement in southern Finland which brought R1a1a1b1 Corded ware culture spoke proto Balto Slavic. Finnish and Sami in a way are the last Paloithic Europeans left since they were so far away from non European inter marriage. I dont really understand why Germans and other people try to connect themselves with Scandinavians. When Germans have very little Scandinavian blood Germanic languages migrated from Germany to only southern Sweden and Norway. That is their only connection.

[Peikko]

Thanks for the comprehensive description. One thing I never understood is, that if the original N1 people were Mongoloid, how did they turn into white and still remain dominantly N1 carriers. Maybe they ditched their Mongoloid women and replaced them with white blond girls.

Yes that germanophilia of some people really amuses me too.

[Fire Haired]

N1 is just a Y DNA haplogroup it only tells ur direct male line not ur full ancestry. So it is possible to have a group of white people with 100% east asian Y DNA O but they can still be 99.99999% white.

[rashka]

http://ukrmap.su/program2010/wh6/1_files/image056.jpghttp://ukrmap.su/program2009/uh7/7_02/73.jpg

These people depicted look like Ukrainians and Balkan Slavs very easily. They have cro-magnid faces.

[Fire Haired]

Rashka i actulley got them from a website that was trying to depict Neolithic ukrianes. They are not suppose to be early Indo Iranians but they looked jsut like them the clothing is not perfect but the best pictures i could get. I dont know what u mean by Cro magnid faces. Cro magnon just means Paloithic Europeans so they lived 11,000ybp or more. They were probably from multple groups of Caucasians migrating out of the mid east. Theyw ould have formed into a distinct ethnic group which is what modern Europeans descend from probably 30,000ybp but i doubt they have their own skull shape or facial features their just caucasin that's all.

[Peikko]

N1 is just a Y DNA haplogroup it only tells ur direct male line not ur full ancestry. So it is possible to have a group of white people with 100% east asian Y DNA O but they can still be 99.99999% white.

Yes exactly. So if we have Mongoloid population where everyone has N1, then the males need to mix with white women. There can't be new male lineages to that population because otherwise it would introduce other haplogroups.

[Fire Haired]

Huzzer just saying ur Y DNA and mtDNA haplogroups are both Caucasin. click on them it explains it G2a (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Feurope%2FHaplog roup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml&ei=3voOUo6WM6_8yAH6ooBI&usg=AFQjCNECv7utd8wTUIdm6x0jVLN_4tQIRw&sig2=ncjBQrgAsXfzPgLV0KeqTA&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWc) and H1 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDsQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geni.com%2Fprojects%2FH1-mtDNA&ei=_foOUt3pNKvYyAH83IEo&usg=AFQjCNE4wlObmJrzD0D4S1HN-YEKAdZMxg&sig2=4hFL0XTNh5p-1PcBIqoVDQ&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWc). Ur direct maternal ancestor so probably H1 goes back to Spain in the last ice age around 20,000ybp ur direct paternal ancestor so G2a probably goes back to somewere around the Caucus and Iran over 10,000ybp. So ur not 101% Mongol ur at least part European and mid eastern. Mongols had constnt contact with genetically European Indo Iranian speakers from 4,500-1,600ybp. Ancient DNA proves they mixed when u find people with a European or Indo iranian Y DNA or mtDNA and Mmongliod mtDNA or y DNA haplogroup. Mongols in the globe13 aust dna test results are 59.1% east asian, 35% Siberian, 2.3% west asian, 2% north euro(Paloithic European arived over 30,000ybp), 1% med, 0.5% ameridana.

It is true Mongols and Turkic tribes from the area like the Huns were incredible warriors. Ur are kind of right it seems the extremented Indo Iranians like Sycthians but we dont know there could be other reasons. The Germanic Italo Celtic tribes of bronze and iron age west Europe would whop on any mongols or Turks. They dominated so much they exterminated 50% of the paternal lines in west Europe were killed off mongol or turkic tribes every did that.

[Anglojew]

Anyone know if there's a link between Indo-Iranians and YDNA haplogroup Q?

[Anglojew]

Our Turkic ancestors have exterminated them and turned them into a thing of the museums.

http://i42.tinypic.com/206gbw8.jpg


Actually I think both groups intermarried to such an extent they created Azaris and other mixed-populations.

[Peikko]

I think u need to study more on Human Y DNA.

If u are talking about skin color i am about as white as naturally possible. Redheads are the palest people on earth.
Well, in pigmentation I'm definitely whiter than you then. I have blond hair and white skin, so my pigmentation can't be found among non European populations. Pale red heads on the other hand are common among some more Mongoloid uralic groups like Udmurts. :cool:

[Fire Haired]

it is a fact redheads have the palest natural skin in the world it is a caucasin probably specifcalley european trait. udmurts do have some mongliod admixture probably less than finnish but get their red hair from their europen side. there are some smartien redheads. samartiens spit from the jews i dont know when and inter married with non jews around palistine. they only breed with each other there are only 700 left there have been dna tests on all of them not one had a drop of european blood. i guess yellow blonde hair might be only european but i dont know my skin is still paler. since ur finnish overll u probably have more european blood.

[Fire Haired]

Anyone know if there's a link between Indo-Iranians and YDNA haplogroup Q?

only haplogroups that so far have been found to be connected with indo euro migration out of russia, ukraine, and caucus area. are r1a1a1 M417 and R1b L51 probably also r1b L23. There probably other groups but those are the main ones. y dna Q is almost 100% in native americans and very popular in central siberia besides that it is pretty rare.

[d3cimat3d]

Huzzer just saying ur Y DNA and mtDNA haplogroups are both Caucasin.

I was more or less joking, but yes, my G2a1a is exclusive to the Caucasus, specifically Ossetia where my paternal grandfather is from. That doesn't mean I cannot have be part Siberian AUTOSOMALLY (I am 3%). Y-dna is such a small fraction of your ancestry, I think you pay too much attention to it. For example the majority of Hondurans are R1b despite being 90% Amerindian.


Anyone know if there's a link between Indo-Iranians and YDNA haplogroup Q?

None at all. Q emerged from the depths of Siberia when the Turko-Mongols burst on the scene. R1a is exclusively Indo-Iranian, all tested I-I remains to date have been R1a.


Actually I think both groups intermarried to such an extent they created Azaris and other mixed-populations.

Azeris are predominately Caucasus folk with very little Mongoloid genes.

There was some intermarriage, but mostly ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. There's a reason why in ancient times Iranian people dominated central Asia but now only the high mountains of Tajikistan is where they found safe haven from the genocidal Turkic hordes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebBxaWq10Gw

[Anglojew]

only haplogroups that so far have been found to be connected with indo euro migration out of russia, ukraine, and caucus area. are r1a1a1 M417 and R1b L51 probably also r1b L23. There probably other groups but those are the main ones. y dna Q is almost 100% in native americans and very popular in central siberia besides that it is pretty rare.

They may have intermarried and brought it back via Atlai or Siberia?

[rashka]

Didn't I just see the last name of the woman as Zorabian in that video?

[Sky earth]

I was more or less joking, but yes, my G2a1a is exclusive to the Caucasus, specifically Ossetia where my paternal grandfather is from. That doesn't mean I cannot have be part Siberian AUTOSOMALLY (I am 3%). Y-dna is such a small fraction of your ancestry, I think you pay too much attention to it. For example the majority of Hondurans are R1b despite being 90% Amerindian.



None at all. Q emerged from the depths of Siberia when the Turko-Mongols burst on the scene. R1a is exclusively Indo-Iranian, all tested I-I remains to date have been R1a.



Azeris are predominately Caucasus folk with very little Mongoloid genes.

There was some intermarriage, but mostly ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. There's a reason why in ancient times Iranian people dominated central Asia but now only the high mountains of Tajikistan is where they found safe haven from the genocidal Turkic hordes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebBxaWq10Gw

Stupid pan-Iranist video. Lol at the statement " We don't have any "Aryan" Y-DNA markers in Central Asia today but Western mtDNA is not uncommon". That's a stupid statement because most Turkic people carry Haplogroup R1a

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_Central_and_North_Asian_populat ions

Scythians from Central Asia were anything but pure Iranic. The Saka people from Central Asia were probably a confederation between Turkic and Eastern Iranic nomads. It's not a coincidence that the Saka people "suddenly" disappeared in history after the Gökturks appeared in the 6th century

[d3cimat3d]

Stupid pan-Iranist video. Lol at the statement " We don't have any "Aryan" Y-DNA markers in Central Asia today but Western mtDNA is not uncommon". That's a stupid statement because most Turkic people carry Haplogroup R1a

Never mind the video and its flaws, if you are making claims that the Turkic take-over of central Asia was peaceful than you need to take a look at history. We can start with proto-Turkic times when the war-like Xiongnu (Huns?) conquered the peaceful Iranic speaking Yuezhi.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2qas3sw.png

http://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=xiongnu+yuezhi&source=bl&ots=SulwPZ0RP3&sig=duQWw_OTe-08ALHTAkT-lgd1h3M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HyQRUpPhEYv8iQKxsYHYDw&ved=0CC8Q6AEwATgU#v=onepage&q&f=false




Scythians from Central Asia were anything but pure Iranic. The Saka people from Central Asia were probably a confederation between Turkic and Eastern Iranic nomads. It's not a coincidence that the Saka people "suddenly" disappeared in history after the Gökturks appeared in the 6th century

Though the video I posted may be pan-Iranicist, it's clear you are a pan-Turanist which is not any better. Saka is the Persian equivalent of Skolotoi - the Greek word for Scythians, there's nothing Turkic about it. The Saka people disappeared from history because they either were absorbed by the Gokturks or migrated to Europe under the ethnonym Sauromatian.

[Sky earth]

Never mind the video and its flaws, if you are making claims that the Turkic take-over of central Asia was peaceful than you need to take a look at history. We can start with proto-Turkic times when the war-like Xiongnu (Huns?) conquered the peaceful Iranic speaking Yuezhi.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2qas3sw.png

http://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=xiongnu+yuezhi&source=bl&ots=SulwPZ0RP3&sig=duQWw_OTe-08ALHTAkT-lgd1h3M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HyQRUpPhEYv8iQKxsYHYDw&ved=0CC8Q6AEwATgU#v=onepage&q&f=false




Though the video I posted may be pan-Iranicist, it's clear you are a pan-Turanist which is not any better. Saka is the Persian equivalent of Skolotoi - the Greek word for Scythians, there's nothing Turkic about it. The Saka people disappeared from history because they either were absorbed by the Gokturks or migrated to Europe under the ethnonym Sauromatian.

Did you know that Scythians were famous in the antiquity for making skull cups from the enemies just like the Turkics and Mongolics in the middle ages? Herodotus has written so many times about the Scythians but strangely he never mentioned that the Persians and the Scythians spoke similar languages. Not only Herodotus but also other Greek historians in the antiquity have never mentioned about the language similarities between Persians and Scythians. Between 400 CE and the 16th century the Byzantine sources used the name "Scythian" in referance to twelve Turkic peoples. That's not a coincidence. The Persians have also called the Saka people as "those with the pointed hats". Modern Turkic nomads like Kazakhs or Sakhas wear those pointed hats like the Scythians but strangely the assumed descendants of the Scyths the Ossetians wear completely different clothes than their "ancestors"

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OA9fvXlhuaA/UBfJcIcMOjI/AAAAAAAAAPY/flOiOTrSqkY/s1600/kazakhs.jpg
http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/EOP/First_Lady/album2/img001.jpg
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/pub/libs/images/usr/14705.jpg
http://en.planetyakutia.com/webroot/delivery/thumbnails/300x200_11.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/89/232422731_5b7f13e8e5_b.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-An7Y6K4YmS4/TzIPjszzj4I/AAAAAAAAAlw/1i6Ij4vYZRs/s320/scythians2.jpg
http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/17818923/2/stock-photo-17818923-kazakh-traditional-dress.jpg
http://realtruth.org/images/scythian-ashz-120523.jpg
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-A1NqySD-Z4I/TXpi6zm9v6I/AAAAAAAAAhQ/ApmWRvkGWl0/s400/kazakh%2Bcostume2.jpg
http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/kyrgyz_03_02/k02_16771099.jpg
http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/4149/PreviewComp/SuperStock_4149-12925.jpg

Theophan the Byzantian (5 c.) renders Huns as Scythians. He writes: Meanwhile Scyth Attila, son of Omnudiy, brave and proud man, removed his senior brother Vdela, assumed sole authority over Scythians, which also are named Unns, and attacked Thracia (Theophan the Byzantian, 1884, 81). On the other side, he depicts Türks as Massagets: East from Tanaid live Türks, in antiquity called Massagets. Persians in their language call them Kermikhions (Byzantian Historians. SPb., 1861, 492). In this record of Theophan deserves an attention the fact that he knew well both Massagets (one of the Scythian tribes), and Persians. If Scythians-Massagets spoke Persian, he would inevitably note this detail. But Theophan identifies Massagets with Türks, not with Persians.

There is a Turkic tribe in Northeastern Russia and those people call themselves SAKHA in their language but The Russians call them "Yakuts" which is false. The Scythians from the Northern Black Sea spoke probably an Eastern Iranic language but the Scythians from Central Asia were probably a mix between Eastern Iranic and Turkic nomads. It's funny that the Iranocentrists from Wikipedia try to tell me that Scythians spoke only one language when Herodotus wrotes 3000 years earlier in his texts that the Scythians spoke DIFFERENT languages. I don't care if Scythians only spoke one Eastern Iranian language because the modern Turkic peoples are definitely CULTURALLY the descendants of Scythians

[ButlerKing]

http://www.biography.com/imported/images/Biography/Images/Profiles/K/Genghis-Khan-WC-9308634-1-402.jpg

Genghis Kahn was not red haired and blue eyed. It is true that Indo Iranian speakers who had around 3-15% red hair were one of the bigest ethnic group in all of central asia from 4,000-1,600ybp. Also they did have contact with Mongols, Turks, and other east asian people around China for over 4,000 years. This does not mean everyone who had contact with them in central asia was a redhead. The Indo iranian tribes in asia were eventulley conquered by east asian Turkic and Mongol tribes from 400-1000ad. Today u find almost no redheads or European looking people period in those areas of asia but alot of their R1a1a1b2 Z92 Y DNA is still left. I think u already know Indo Iranian language is still all over the place in pretty much all land from India to Iran and even the kurds a huge ethnic group in Iraq, Turkey, and Syria.


There is apparently 7% Caucasoid Y-DNA and 14.3% Caucasoid mtDNA in Mongolians.

But Genghis Khan wasn't white not even mixed but a pure Mongoloid (almost). The problem is not that he had red hair and green eyes but is how some people perceive it as white.

When in reality he looked like this
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/Duo9t6jJkAE/mqdefault.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg

Even his son odagei Khan had blue eyes and reddish beard but he look like a Mongoloid nothing like a caucasian

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/YuanEmperorAlbumOgedeiPortrait.jpg

[Fire Haired]

Butlerking what real evidence do u have genghis kahn has red hair and green eyes. Also there was tons of indo Iranian speakers migrations all over asia from 5,000-3,500ybp. 3,400 and 3,000 year old tarium mummies of almost defintley indo Iranians had red hair the sycthians who dominated most of central asia in the iron age were uselly described and blue eyed and red hair or fair haired. the Tocherians aka Yuezhia who lived in west china mainly i think around 500-700ad were described by ancient Chinese writers i saw this on Wikipedia and a documentary as tall, having high noses, red and blonde hair with big beards, and huge blue eyes. The 4,000 year old tarium mummies in west china were very early indo Iranians and their y dna was R1a1a (probably R1a1a1b2 but they did not test that far) and they had mainly Mongliod mtDNA C4 they were a total mix of European and east asia.

So in south Siberia, west china, and Mongolia there has been inter marriage with very light haired indo Iranians since over 4,000ybp. There is no doubt that is why sometimes east Asian looking people in that area will have blue eyes or other non east asian features. It is true that Monglionan and central Siberian people do have a little European blood more than any other east asians but no way do they have a significant amount of European. Genghis Kahn was probably a typical looking east asian person. And who cares if he did have red hair i guess that is interesting but we know why it is Indo Iranian tribes.

[ButlerKing]

Butlerking what real evidence do u have genghis kahn has red hair and green eyes. Also there was tons of indo Iranian speakers migrations all over asia from 5,000-3,500ybp. 3,400 and 3,000 year old tarium mummies of almost defintley indo Iranians had red hair the sycthians who dominated most of central asia in the iron age were uselly described and blue eyed and red hair or fair haired. the Tocherians aka Yuezhia who lived in west china mainly i think around 500-700ad were described by ancient Chinese writers i saw this on Wikipedia and a documentary as tall, having high noses, red and blonde hair with big beards, and huge blue eyes. The 4,000 year old tarium mummies in west china were very early indo Iranians and their y dna was R1a1a (probably R1a1a1b2 but they did not test that far) and they had mainly Mongliod mtDNA C4 they were a total mix of European and east asia.

So in south Siberia, west china, and Mongolia there has been inter marriage with very light haired indo Iranians since over 4,000ybp. There is no doubt that is why sometimes east Asian looking people in that area will have blue eyes or other non east asian features. It is true that Monglionan and central Siberian people do have a little European blood more than any other east asians but no way do they have a significant amount of European. Genghis Kahn was probably a typical looking east asian person. And who cares if he did have red hair i guess that is interesting but we know why it is Indo Iranian tribes.

Because there are red hair and blue eyes Mongolians today and persian historian mentioned Genghis Khan ancestor had red hair.


These Tocharian tribes did not live in China historically, their territory was only incorporated in 1949.


This is original territory of Chinese
http://i44.tinypic.com/18yzci.gif



This is them conquered by Chinese during Tang dynasty
http://i44.tinypic.com/107s200.png

This is China today

http://i44.tinypic.com/2nbw1sj.jpg

[Fire Haired]

The Tocherians aka Yuezhia were not conquered by Chinses they were conquered by a Turkic tribe named Ughur around 600-700ad. I think u need to remeber a phrase like German or Chinese do not repsent race they repsent mainly a language. So just because Chinese did not arrive in modern western China does not mean Mongliod have been in west china tarium basin area for only that long. Modern day Ughur do have many light haired Indo Iranian type features and according to aust DNA have alot of European and middle eastern blood. They are extremely diverse and mixed and not Chinese. There were no Tocherians in 1949 the ethnic group was extremneted sure some of ther blood lines still existed but not themselves as a tribe and language.

Red hair itself is extremley rare so i doubt there are alot. It makes total sense there are blonde haired or any other type of non Mongliod feature in Mongols who's ancestors had contact and inter marraige with people like Tocherians and Sycthians for over 4,000 years. Whne u mix of European and east asian genes for that long stuff like that happens.

Here is a example of a Ughur with mixed European and east asian features
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Girl_in_Turpan,_Xinjiang,_China_-_20050712.jpg
http://uyghuramerican.org/sites/default/files/field/image/e5bc9__Uyghur.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7119/8169457985_f387164b08_z.jpg
http://www.fravahr.org/local/cache-vignettes/L256xH390/Uyghur_boy_Kashgar-9a31b.jpg
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls6kz7uWmK1qb8f5co1_r1_500.png

[d3cimat3d]

Did you know that Scythians were famous in the antiquity for making skull cups from the enemies just like the Turkics and Mongolics in the middle ages?

I'm well aware. It is a steppe custom originally started by Indo-European migrants from the west.



Between 400 CE and the 16th century the Byzantine sources used the name "Scythian" in referance to twelve Turkic peoples. That's not a coincidence.

Scythian became an umbrella term for all nomads north-east of the Danube delta.



The Persians have also called the Saka people as "those with the pointed hats". Modern Turkic nomads like Kazakhs or Sakhas wear those pointed hats like the Scythians

The Turks stole the hats for themselves just as they stole horse riding, ditched their hunter-gatherer lifestyle for a nomadic pastoralist one and picked up horse archery. TURKS DID NOT COME UP WITH THESE THINGS ON THEIR OWN BUT ADOPTED IT FROM INDO-EUROPEAN MIGRANTS FROM THE WEST.



but strangely the assumed descendants of the Scyths the Ossetians wear completely different clothes than their "ancestors"

Oh yeah?


Bashlyk - round-topped felt bonnet, with lappets. Was popular among the Cossacks and in the Caucasus. The prototypes of bashlyk can be seen on the decoration of the Scythian vases.

http://www.cossackweb.narod.ru/cossacks/dict.htm

http://i44.tinypic.com/11sjypk.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashlyk



. I don't care if Scythians only spoke one Eastern Iranian language because the modern Turkic peoples are definitely CULTURALLY the descendants of Scythians

Modern Turkic people only hijacked Scythian culture and way of life. Every accomplishment Turks ever achieved is the credit of the technology brought by Indo-Europeans from the west. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who is convinced about Pan-Turkicist fantasies, I've already been through this with Kipchak_Hakan and Siberian Cold Breeze, who couldn't accept the fact that their ancestors were genocidal maniacs.

[Sky earth]

I'm well aware. It is a steppe custom originally started by Indo-European migrants from the west.



Scythian became an umbrella term for all nomads north-east of the Danube delta.



The Turks stole the hats for themselves just as they stole horse riding, ditched their hunter-gatherer lifestyle for a nomadic pastoralist one and picked up horse archery. TURKS DID NOT COME UP WITH THESE THINGS ON THEIR OWN BUT ADOPTED IT FROM INDO-EUROPEAN MIGRANTS FROM THE WEST.



Oh yeah?



http://www.cossackweb.narod.ru/cossacks/dict.htm

http://i44.tinypic.com/11sjypk.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashlyk




Modern Turkic people only hijacked Scythian culture and way of life. Every accomplishment Turks ever achieved is the credit of the technology brought by Indo-Europeans from the west. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who is convinced about Pan-Turkicist fantasies, I've already been through this with Kipchak_Hakan and Siberian Cold Breeze, who couldn't accept the fact that their ancestors were genocidal maniacs.

All those Indo-European centrists come with the same bullshit everyday. You stole this and this from the Scythians blah blah blah. You are too silly to search for other sources than Wikipedia about the Scythians but you can believe in your pure Iranic Scythians bullshit written by butthurt Iranocentrists from Wikipedia. Ossetians are mainly native Caucasian and their language has over 50 % non Indo-European Caucasian words and the men carry mostly Haplogroup G2 (80-90% of the men). You can find your mighty "AR1an" Haplogroups in most Turkic peoples like Altaians or Khotons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_Central_and_North_Asian_populat ions

Most Kurgan burials from ancient Central Asian steppe nomads show also predominantly R1a men with Mongoloid admixed women on the maternal side just like most Turkic peoples today. The Pazyryk culture is a hot candidate for Proto-Turks.

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=25hirzk&s=6
http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/11/iron-age-pazyryk-mtdna.html

Even if you're right and the Saka people have only spoken an Eastern Iranian language. It's not my fault that the Eastern Iranics were too stupid for the retention of their language and rather adopted Turkic languages after a while. Or what do you will tell me? That evil Turco-Mongol women raped Iranic Scythian men and created modern Turkic peoples? Lol:D

You are even too stupid to notice that Bashlyk is actually a Turkic word and that it is worn by Turkic peoples and Cossacks, who were mostly East Slavic people, who adopted the military skills of steppe nomads like Tatars or Mongols. No words about the Caucasian Ossetians in this article.

Spaniards like you should be the LAST ethnicity to blame other peoples for mass genocides. I think it's well known what your ancestors did to Native Americans and ESPECIALLY to Native American women in Southern America. The results today are race confused Mestizos and Mulattos like Mexicans and Cubans.

[ButlerKing]

The Tocherians aka Yuezhia were not conquered by Chinses they were conquered by a Turkic tribe named Ughur around 600-700ad. I think u need to remeber a phrase like German or Chinese do not repsent race they repsent mainly a language. So just because Chinese did not arrive in modern western China does not mean Mongliod have been in west china tarium basin area for only that long. Modern day Ughur do have many light haired Indo Iranian type features and according to aust DNA have alot of European and middle eastern blood. They are extremely diverse and mixed and not Chinese. There were no Tocherians in 1949 the ethnic group was extremneted sure some of ther blood lines still existed but not themselves as a tribe and language.

Red hair itself is extremley rare so i doubt there are alot. It makes total sense there are blonde haired or any other type of non Mongliod feature in Mongols who's ancestors had contact and inter marraige with people like Tocherians and Sycthians for over 4,000 years. Whne u mix of European and east asian genes for that long stuff like that happens.

Here is a example of a Ughur with mixed European and east asian features
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Girl_in_Turpan,_Xinjiang,_China_-_20050712.jpg
http://uyghuramerican.org/sites/default/files/field/image/e5bc9__Uyghur.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7119/8169457985_f387164b08_z.jpg
http://www.fravahr.org/local/cache-vignettes/L256xH390/Uyghur_boy_Kashgar-9a31b.jpg
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls6kz7uWmK1qb8f5co1_r1_500.png

You apparently don't know history that well. They were ruled or occupied or controlled by Turkic, Chinese, Mongolic, Tibeto-Burmese, Sino-Tibetan people of western China for more than 600 years


The recorded history of the area now known as Xinjiang dates to the 2nd millennium BC. There have been many empires, primarily Han Chinese, Turkic, and Mongolic, that have ruled over the region, including the Yuezhi, Xiongnu Empire, Han Dynasty, Sixteen Kingdoms of the Jin Dynasty (Former Liang, Former Qin, Later Liang, and Western Liáng), Tang Dynasty, Uyghur Khaganate, Kara-Khanid Khanate, Mongol Empire (Yuan Dynasty), Yarkent Khanate, Mongolic Dzungar Khanate, and Manchu Qing Dynasty. Xinjiang was previously known as "Xiyu" (西域), under the Han Dynasty, which drove the Xiongnu empire out of the region in 60 BCE in an effort to secure the profitable Silk Road,[1] but was renamed Xinjiang (新疆, meaning "new frontier") when the region was conquered by the Manchu-led Qing Dynasty in 1759. Xinjiang is now a part of the People's Republic of China, having been so since its founding year of 1949.

Uyghurs are genetically 52% East Asian/Siberian

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2010/11/uyafr.png


Exactly like a modern day Eurasian. Here is a half Korean guy who is red haired eurasian.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JIlUQXnCi8

[d3cimat3d]

All those Indo-European centrists come with the same bullshit everyday. You stole this and this from the Scythians blah blah blah. You are too silly to search for Scythians but you can believe in your pure Iranic Scythians bullshit written by butthurt Iranocentrists from Wikipedia.

I'm not but-hurt about anything, for your information I am half Balkan Turkish. The difference between me and you is I am after the truth, you however mold history and genetics to fit your pan-Turkicist fantasies.



Do you mean the caucasian Ossetians? Their language has over 50 % non Indo-European

The 50% claim by Turkicworld is stupid, just like their ridiculous claim of how Bosnia was founded by Pechenegs (Besenyo in Hungarian). That website is full retard.

Obviously there is a Vainakh and maybe even also a Turkic substrate but it is no where near 50%. That doesn't change the fact that Sarmatian etchings from Olbia match those of modern Ossetic. Not to mention the Jassic people in Hungary.



Caucasian words and the men carry mostly Haplogroup G2 (80-90% of the men) You can find your mighty "AR1an" Haplogroups in many Turkic peoples like Altaians or Khotons


Don't be pseudo-Scientific. Turkic =/= Iranic. Maybe next you will claim Magyars actually came from Sumer like the majority of Hungarians believe?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_Central_and_North_Asian_populat ions


OoOo Mr.geneticist, nice links to wikipedia. Tell me do you have even the most basic of personal genome accounts (23andmee FTdna?). If not than why pretend to be an expert on genetics when you cannot comprehend concepts like founder effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect) and population bottleneck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck)?



Most Kurgan burials from ancient Central Asian steppe nomads show also predominantly R1a men with Mongoloid admixed women on the maternal side just like most Turkic peoples today

Fair enough, some Scythians penetrated Turkic society and managed to acheive elite status, so? That still doesn't change the fact that the modal haplogroups associated with early Turks would have been Q and C, not R1a. R1a came from Europe, stop believing in conspiracy theories Mr.NWO.



Even if you're right and the Saka people have only spoken an Eastern Iranian language it's not my fault that the Eastern Iranics were too stupid for the retention of their language and rather adopted Turkic languages after a while. Or what will you tell me? That evil Turco-Mongol women raped Iranic Scythian men and created modern Turkic peoples? Lol:D


The Sakha/Yakut is either a coincidence or maybe the Yakut were paying homage to a very small aspect of their ancestry. Either way it doesn't really matter.



You are even too stupid to notice that Bashlyk is actually a Turkic word .

Thanks for pointing that out captain obvious.



and that it is worn by Turkic peoples and Cossacks who were mostly East Slavic people who adopted the military skills of steppe nomads like Tatars or Mongols. No words about the Caucasian Ossetians in this article.

Cossack clothes = 100% from the Caucasus. You didn't know?



Spaniards like you should be the least ethnicity to blame other peoples for mass genocides. I think it's well known what your ancestors did to Native Americans and ESPECIALLY to Native American women in Southern America. The results today are race confused Mestizos and Mulattos like Mexicans and Cubans.

Stop rabidly defending "your people". You are only a tiny fraction Turkic by blood. Even Turkmens are not pure Turks but mostly just Persians, and considering Seljuks would have been almost identical to Turkmens, that makes you even less Turk because Seljuks force fed their language to the Armenian and Byzantine masses.

[Demhat]

No they weren't, they were Caucasoids from west of the Urals.

True, if we look out for linguistic connection maps, Uralic populations share most similarities to Indo-European, Caucasian, Dravidian languages, Altaic and to Afro-Asiatic languages shows us they must have been pred. Caucasian what they still are.

[Demhat]

http://www.biography.com/imported/images/Biography/Images/Profiles/K/Genghis-Khan-WC-9308634-1-402.jpg

Genghis Kahn was not red haired and blue eyed. It is true that Indo Iranian speakers who had around 3-15% red hair were one of the bigest ethnic group in all of central asia from 4,000-1,600ybp. Also they did have contact with Mongols, Turks, and other east asian people around China for over 4,000 years. This does not mean everyone who had contact with them in central asia was a redhead. The Indo iranian tribes in asia were eventulley conquered by east asian Turkic and Mongol tribes from 400-1000ad. Today u find almost no redheads or European looking people period in those areas of asia but alot of their R1a1a1b2 Z92 Y DNA is still left. I think u already know Indo Iranian language is still all over the place in pretty much all land from India to Iran and even the kurds a huge ethnic group in Iraq, Turkey, and Syria.

Just one painting. There are records about Genghis Khan having Green Eyes. He was most likely mixed.

[ButlerKing]

Just one painting. There are records about Genghis Khan having Green Eyes. He was most likely mixed.

That's exactly the problem here, you claim him to mixed but how mixed?

Like for example if he is 82% Mongoloid but only 18% Caucasoid,is that still mixed race???
none of these people even look like the red hair Uighurs

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/Duo9t6jJkAE/mqdefault.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg
http://www.loveme.com/images/p81861-1.jpg
http://www.1st-attractive.com/imagegirl/1050_38329_2.jpg
http://www.alamy.com/thumbs/6/%7B1571B4D4-D71A-479E-BD30-2E018C2B7AEF%7D/AFKJYN.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-w_sQ9ZbmEWU/UPAKX073m1I/AAAAAAAAA48/PngPbDX2b-w/s760/near%2Bpogo%2Bhostel.JPG
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zN8DsPHpIAQ/UOWpEt9a0XI/AAAAAAAAAvM/Vf-6R1aV3lg/s760/cold%2Bday%2Bat%2Bexhibition.jpg

[Demhat]

what evidence do u have Y DNA N1c which totally repsents Uralic languages in Europe is in the Mongliod Y DNA family. It is the brother to O which domintes east asia. Also how do u explain Uralic speakers in northern Siberia who are completly east asian they have N1b.

sure the language may have started west of the urals in europe but by east asian people.

The Kunda culture which spread acroos alot of northeast Europe is suspected to be were Urlaic languages in Europe came from. Kunda started about 7,000ybp. Compare it to the map of N1c in Europe.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-N.gifhttp://www.eupedia.com/images/content/old_neolithic_map.gif

N as much as P is not possible to be classified as either Caucasian or East Asiatic. Some N sub clades are Caucasian other Mongolid just like R is Caucasian though being related to Q and even among Q some clades are Caucasian other are Siberian or Native American. The Proto Uralic speakers were most likely Caucasian with some genetic ties to Mongolids, since they belong to Haplogroups with ties to Mongolids, just like West Asian, South Asian and North European autosomal Genes do. Also autosomal DNA of Uralic speakers is pred Caucasian.

[Demhat]

That's exactly the problem here, you claim him to mixed but how mixed?

Like for example if he is 82% Mongoloid but only 18% Caucasoid, is that still mixed race? none of these people even look like the red hair Uyghurs

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/Duo9t6jJkAE/mqdefault.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg
http://www.loveme.com/images/p81861-1.jpg
http://www.1st-attractive.com/imagegirl/1050_38329_2.jpg
http://www.alamy.com/thumbs/6/%7B1571B4D4-D71A-479E-BD30-2E018C2B7AEF%7D/AFKJYN.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-w_sQ9ZbmEWU/UPAKX073m1I/AAAAAAAAA48/PngPbDX2b-w/s760/near%2Bpogo%2Bhostel.JPG
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zN8DsPHpIAQ/UOWpEt9a0XI/AAAAAAAAAvM/Vf-6R1aV3lg/s760/cold%2Bday%2Bat%2Bexhibition.jpg

Like the Guy on the second, fourth or fifth photo. Something on the 30 or 40% Indo-Iranian (most likely Scythian).

[ButlerKing]

Like the Guy on the second photo. Something on the 30 or 40% Indo-Iranian (most likely Scythian).

Well that's clearly bullshit, I don't see the slightest caucasoid features in them

Western Mongolians are known for having lighter hair and lighter eyes but the Caucasian admixture is only up to 15 - 19% while eastern Mongolians are black hair and black eyes but their caucasian admixture is only 0.5 - 7%

http://i39.tinypic.com/2ppyhbm.jpg

[Demhat]

Indo Iranian is a branch of the Indo European language family tree they also have their own branch of R1a which is R1a1a1b2 Z93.

I would be careful with that. It's out of doubt that the main R1a clade of Indo-Iranians is Z93 yet it is very likely that they had their good share of Z280. I know of at least 3 Kurds who have been tested positive for Z280. One of them is even active here.

[ButlerKing]

N as much as P is not possible to be classified as either Caucasian or East Asiatic. Some N sub clades are Caucasian other Mongolid just like R is Caucasian though being related to Q and even among Q some clades are Caucasian other are Siberian or Native American. The Proto Uralic speakers were most likely Caucasian with some genetic ties to Mongolids, since they belong to Haplogroups with ties to Mongolids, just like West Asian, South Asian and North European autosomal Genes do. Also autosomal DNA of Uralic speakers is pred Caucasian.


Oldest Proto-Uralic by Russian anthropologist
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg

( Russian translation to English)

FACE OF ANTHROPOLOGY
There has been an act of invasion of the Finno-Ugric peoples of Eastern origin in the territory inhabited by Caucasians. Dnieper-Donets culture has developed Caucasians, after which it mingled with the Finno-Ugric tribes. This is confirmed by the data from the repository and Yasinovatka, which (like the Vasiljevka II) is the most ancient among the other cemeteries of the Dnieper-Donets culture. Moreover, it contains the burial of non-simultaneity and divide the period of 500 years (between A and B).

Since culture comb-ceramic spread anthropological type, bearing the features of a "relaxed Mongoloid." In the anthropological literature, it is named laponoidnogo. From the point of view of anthropologists, "there is every reason to believe that the origin of anthropological traits media cultures comb-ceramics associated with the eastern parts of Russia." In particular, male and female skulls from graves 19 and 20 (Sahtysh II), belonging to the comb-culture and dating con. 4th - early. 3rd millennium BC. e. have pronounced Mongoloid appearance - "brain structure of the skull, face and horizontal profile morphology of the nose in two sahtyshskih skulls undoubtedly confirm their membership of the Mongoloid race.

[Demhat]

Well that's clearly bullshit, I don't see the slightest caucasoid features in them



Well than you need to check your eyes. All of them, especially the second individual screams Caucasian features. That Mongolians and even Kyrgyz share good percentage of Caucasian genes was proven anyways.

And who on Mother Earth said that Genghis Khan was your typical Mongol that you come up with a genetic scale of Mongols?

20% Caucasian is significant enough to show Caucasian off Caucasian features.

[ButlerKing]

Haplogroup Q and N are definitely not Caucasians especially haplogroup Q.

The origin of Haplogroup Q are Mongoloid because the Siberian Turkic people are full blooded Mongoloid and they have high frequencies of Q, the Native American have nearly 80% Q. However the high frequest of Q from Central Asia and Turkmen of middle east are also have Siberian in DNA.


Western Uralic people have from 16.5 to 35% Mongoloid admixture even though they have 40-50% N and the Finns and Saami who have 60% haplogroup N also have 6.25 to 16% Mongoloid admixture.

[ButlerKing]

Well than you need to check your eyes. All of them, especially the second individual screams Caucasian features. That Mongolians and even Kyrgyz share good percentage of Caucasian genes was proven anyways.

And who on Mother Earth said that Genghis Khan was your typical Mongol that you come up with a genetic scale of Mongols?

20% Caucasian is significant enough to show Caucasian off Caucasian features.

No you check your eyes, where is the Caucasians ? in your own hallucination maybe

Mongolian guy
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg

Korean guy
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sXK64ofoMPs/T-PVUeasfTI/AAAAAAAALLw/u1rjr_7T2XA/s1600/chinese-beard1.jpg

Scottish guy
http://www.raising-redheads.com/images/Redhead-Young-Man.jpg

[Demhat]

Oldest Proto-Uralic by Russian anthropologist
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg

( Russian translation to English)

FACE OF ANTHROPOLOGY
There has been an act of invasion of the Finno-Ugric peoples of Eastern origin in the territory inhabited by Caucasians. Dnieper-Donets culture has developed Caucasians, after which it mingled with the Finno-Ugric tribes. This is confirmed by the data from the repository and Yasinovatka, which (like the Vasiljevka II) is the most ancient among the other cemeteries of the Dnieper-Donets culture. Moreover, it contains the burial of non-simultaneity and divide the period of 500 years (between A and B).

Since culture comb-ceramic spread anthropological type, bearing the features of a "relaxed Mongoloid." In the anthropological literature, it is named laponoidnogo. From the point of view of anthropologists, "there is every reason to believe that the origin of anthropological traits media cultures comb-ceramics associated with the eastern parts of Russia." In particular, male and female skulls from graves 19 and 20 (Sahtysh II), belonging to the comb-culture and dating con. 4th - early. 3rd millennium BC. e. have pronounced Mongoloid appearance - "brain structure of the skull, face and horizontal profile morphology of the nose in two sahtyshskih skulls undoubtedly confirm their membership of the Mongoloid race.

Please no copy paste.

Are you now tackling established facts and common sense? Its a matter of fact that the closest linguistic Cousin of Finno-Ugric are Indo-European, Caucasian, Dravidians, Altaic and not Japanese, Chinese, Mongolian or Korean.

Also there is allot of imagination for the racial classification of the reconstruction above. Who ever believes this reconstruction looks fully Mongolian should go and search for Doctor. If anything the individual looks like a Saami. Saamis are genetically pred. Caucasian. Hell you can even find modern People in the Baltics (especially East Baltid types) which show strong resemblance to this Guy.

Also as I said modern Genetics of Uralic Speakers prove that they are Pred. Caucasian with strong Mongolid input.

East Baltid dude

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/197/romanshishkin.jpg
http://z3.ifrm.com/67/29/0/p458005/19.gif
http://www.barentsindigenous.org/getfile.php/908918.1332.accpdatbbs/800x650/Ellinor%20Jåma.jpg?no=3


And now tell me that this reconstruction above, resembles a real Mongol more than these East Baltid individuals.

[ButlerKing]

Please no copy paste.

Are you now tackling established facts? Its a matter of fact that the closest linguistic Cousin of Finno-Ugric are Indo-European, Caucasian, Dravidians, Altaic and not Japanese, Chinese, Mongolian or Korean.

Also there is allot of imagination for the racial classification of the reconstruction above. Who ever believes this reconstruction looks fully Mongolian should go and search for Doctor. If anything the individual looks like a Saami. Saamis are genetically pred. Caucasian. Hell you can even find modern People in the Baltics (especially East Baltid types) which show strong resemblance to this Guy.

Also as I said modern Genetics of Uralic Speakers prove that they are Pred. Caucasian with strong Mongolid input.

East Baltid dude

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/197/romanshishkin.jpg
http://z3.ifrm.com/67/29/0/p458005/19.gif
http://www.barentsindigenous.org/getfile.php/908918.1332.accpdatbbs/800x650/Ellinor%20Jåma.jpg?no=3


And now tell me that this reconstruction above, resembles a real Mongol more than these East Baltid individuals.

I know what you said, but you clearly still don't get the part I posted.

You are posting pictures of Uralics that resembles like Uralic from 1500 - 2000 BC not the original Uralic that dated back 6000 BC. We are talking what Original Uralic look like, aren't we?

Google Translate (http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://rozamira.ucoz.ru/publ/transfizicheskoe_poznanie/istorija/dnepro_doneckaja_kultura/21-1-0-699&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%25A1%25D0%25BE%25D0)

http://i45.tinypic.com/zj80oi.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/317cvte.jpg

Google Translate (http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://aquilaaquilonis.livejournal.com/30486.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%2592%2B%25D1%2586%25D0%25B5%25D 0%25BB%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BC%2B%25D0%25BC%25D1%258B% 2B%25D0%25BC%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B6%25D0%25B5%25D0%25 BC%2B%25D0%25B2%25D1%258B%25D0%25B4%25D0%25B5%25D0 %25BB%25D0%25B8%25D1%2582%25D1%258C%2B%25D1%2581%2 5D1%2580%25D0%25B5%25D0%25B4%25D0%25B8%2B%25D0%25B 2%25D0%25BE%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25BE%25D1%258 7%25D0%25BD%25D1%258B%25D1%2585%2B%25D1%2581%25D0% 25BB%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B2%25D1%258F%25D0%25BD%2B%25 D1%2587%25D0%25B5%25D1%2582%25D1%258B%25D1%2580%25 D0%25B5%2B%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE %25D0%25B2%25D1%258B%25D1%2585%2B%25D1%2582%25D0%2 5B8%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B0%26hl%3Den%26newwindow%3D1% 26biw%3D1422%26bih%3D712%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=jiVlUORxoYfQBc-ugLAP&ved=0CCUQ7gEwAA)
http://i49.tinypic.com/33ausnn.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/20zsh2b.jpg



http://i47.tinypic.com/9tpmx2.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/vzfx53.jpg


The closest analogy to the skull early Finno-Ugric peoples are found in the burial Fofanova in the Baikal region (6th millennium BC)

A 6000 BC Uralic
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg

[Demhat]

No you check your eyes, where is the Caucasians ? in your own hallucination maybe

Mongolian guy
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg

Korean guy
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sXK64ofoMPs/T-PVUeasfTI/AAAAAAAALLw/u1rjr_7T2XA/s1600/chinese-beard1.jpg

Scottish guy
http://www.raising-redheads.com/images/Redhead-Young-Man.jpg


Wow now you have proven your point by comparing two East Asian Making a face to an Scottish Guy. And than the funniest of all even the Korean Guy looks Ultra atypical.

[ButlerKing]

Wow now you have proven your point by comparing two East Asian Making a face to an Scottish Guy. And than the funniest of all even the Korean Guy looks Ultra atypical.

LOL and what the hell is a NON ultra atypical Korean guy supposed to look like?

The second guy you claim that are screaming Caucasian features is a more bullshit claim than pigs can fly. If you have given the guy black hair and black eyes he would look no different to a dark hair/eyes Korean guy.

[Demhat]

I know what you said, but you clearly still don't get the part I posted.

You are posting pictures of Uralics that resembles like Uralic from 1500 - 2000 BC not the original Uralic that dated back 6000 BC. We are talking what Original Uralic look like, aren't we?

Google Translate (http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://rozamira.ucoz.ru/publ/transfizicheskoe_poznanie/istorija/dnepro_doneckaja_kultura/21-1-0-699&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%25A1%25D0%25BE%25D0)

http://i45.tinypic.com/zj80oi.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/317cvte.jpg

Google Translate (http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://aquilaaquilonis.livejournal.com/30486.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25D0%2592%2B%25D1%2586%25D0%25B5%25D 0%25BB%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BC%2B%25D0%25BC%25D1%258B% 2B%25D0%25BC%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B6%25D0%25B5%25D0%25 BC%2B%25D0%25B2%25D1%258B%25D0%25B4%25D0%25B5%25D0 %25BB%25D0%25B8%25D1%2582%25D1%258C%2B%25D1%2581%2 5D1%2580%25D0%25B5%25D0%25B4%25D0%25B8%2B%25D0%25B 2%25D0%25BE%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25BE%25D1%258 7%25D0%25BD%25D1%258B%25D1%2585%2B%25D1%2581%25D0% 25BB%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B2%25D1%258F%25D0%25BD%2B%25 D1%2587%25D0%25B5%25D1%2582%25D1%258B%25D1%2580%25 D0%25B5%2B%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE %25D0%25B2%25D1%258B%25D1%2585%2B%25D1%2582%25D0%2 5B8%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B0%26hl%3Den%26newwindow%3D1% 26biw%3D1422%26bih%3D712%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=jiVlUORxoYfQBc-ugLAP&ved=0CCUQ7gEwAA)
http://i49.tinypic.com/33ausnn.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/20zsh2b.jpg



http://i47.tinypic.com/9tpmx2.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/vzfx53.jpg


The closest analogy to the skull early Finno-Ugric peoples are found in the burial Fofanova in the Baikal region (6th millennium BC)

A 6000 BC Uralic
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg


ManI posted examples which resemble these Uralic reconstruction from 6000 BC which you posted yourself. The problem is you are trying to make an argument against modern Genetics with a Text written Decades ago when there was no Genetic material.

Even the Reconstruction from 6000 BC still looks more like the examples I posted, than any East Asian person.

I do not deny that earliest Uralics had strong Mongolid features, I even mentioned it since they share very ancient ancestry with East Asian. Just like R* carriers did at some point. But the first ever Uralics (when the Uralic languages appeared) were most likely some 70% Caucasian. What they were before that is mere speculation and doesn't matters since Uralic languages started to exist with heavy contact to Caucasian genes. Without Caucasian genes, there wouldn't have been Uralics.

Uralics came to existence when a bunch of Caucasians started to mix and get influenced by Native American/Northeast Asian like people.

[ButlerKing]

ManI posted examples which resemble these Uralic reconstruction from 6000 BC which you posted yourself. The problem is you are trying to make an argument against modern Genetics with a Text written Decades ago when there was no Genetic material.

Even the Reconstruction from 6000 BC still looks more like the examples I posted, than any East Asian person.

I do not deny that earliest Uralics had strong Mongolid features, I even mentioned it since they share very ancient ancestry with East Asian. Just like R* carriers did at some point. But the first ever Uralics (when the Uralic languages appeared) were most likely some 70% Caucasian. What they were before that is mere speculation and doesn't matters since Uralic languages started to exist with heavy contact to Caucasian genes. Without Caucasian genes, there wouldn't have been Uralics.

Uralics came to existence when a bunch of Caucasians started to mix and get influenced by Native American like people.


You have to be insane, even Russian anthropologist classified their skull as Mongoloid not Caucasoid

The problem is you do not have any source or real evidence to support your claim and I really do think you should double check your eyes if you still think that 6000 BC reconstruction look like some Caucasoid. None of the Uralic people you posted come close.

The first original Uralics were Mongoloid Finno Ugric people and later expanded to western Siberia and mixed with Dnieper-Donets culture and received have their Mongoloid admixture which created western uralic people

[Demhat]

LOL and what the hell is a NON ultra atypical Korean guy supposed to look like?

The second guy you claim that are screaming Caucasian features is a more bullshit claim than pigs can guy. If you have given the guy black hair and black eyes he would look no different to a dark hair/eyes Korean guy.

Are you for real.?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Lwyp--6UDlE/TCUCoKMyQVI/AAAAAAAADVI/PfgYN_FkPIs/s200/kim-jong-il.jpg
http://www.asiapundits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/korean-old-man-smoking.jpg
http://www.mamapop.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/old-asian-man.jpg


Anyways no one claimed or denied that the Guy looks much more Asian than Caucasian, you are twisting and laying words in my mouth which I never used. For shit if I say the Guy shows Caucasian features does that mean he looks more like a Caucasian than Asian or why the fu.. do you come up with a photo comparison with him between a Caucasian and Asian?

[Demhat]

You have to be insane, even Russian anthropologist classified their skull as Mongoloid not Caucasoid

The problem is you do not have any source or real evidence to support your claim and I really do think you should double check your eyes if you still think that 6000 BC reconstruction look like some Caucasoid. None of the Uralic people you posted come close.

The first original Uralics were Mongoloid Finno Ugric people and later expanded to western Siberia and mixed with Dnieper-Donets culture and received have their Mongoloid admixture

Now I am sure you must be out of your mind. In morphologic meaning most of East Baltic skulls would be classified as Mongolid but morphology does not prove genetic ties. Your average Arabid Guy shows stronger morphologic similarities to Nordid, does that prove that an German Nordid is closer to an Arab than a German Alpine? Back than there was no genetic material.


You come up with some old school head measuring shit and tell me that I have no real evidences? While I mention facts like Uralic being closest to Caucasian languages or genetic material of Uralics showing that 99% of them are today pred. Caucasian? Back than Uralics where more like 60-70% Caucasian now they are almost fully.

No desire to keep that Discussion going.

[ButlerKing]

Are you for real.?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Lwyp--6UDlE/TCUCoKMyQVI/AAAAAAAADVI/PfgYN_FkPIs/s200/kim-jong-il.jpg
http://www.asiapundits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/korean-old-man-smoking.jpg
http://www.mamapop.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/old-asian-man.jpg


Anyways no one claimed or denied that the Guy looks much more Asian than Caucasian, you are twisting and laying words in my mouth which I never used. For shit if I say the Guy shows Caucasian features does that mean he looks more like a Caucasian than Asian or why the fu.. do you come up with a photo comparison with him between a Caucasian and Asian?


Funny, I though average Korean looked like the people in my picture and nothing like the bottom 2 old men with their distorted old features.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/mediafile/201110/13/F201110130829172223922042.jpg


No you claimed he is 30-40% Indo-Iranian, Scythian or with screaming Caucasian features? red hair asides what else is Caucasian about him?

What is the difference between that guy and this 100% pure Mongoloid Hmong girl with red hair and gray eyes

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s283/shortypai/paisdigital043.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Now I am sure you must be out of your mind. In morphologic meaning most of East Baltic skulls would be classified as Mongolid but morphology does not prove genetic ties. Your average Arabid Guy shows stronger morphologic similarities to Nordid, does that prove that an German Nordid is closer to an Arab than a German Alpine? Back than there was no genetic material.


You come up with some old school head measuring shit and tell me that I have no real evidences? While I mention facts like Uralic being closest to Caucasian languages or genetic material of Uralics showing that 99% of them are today pred. Caucasian? Back than Uralics where more like 60-70% Caucasian now they are almost fully.

No desire to keep that Discussion going.

1. That skull isn't classified as East Baltic but eastern Siberian. They already know the damn difference between East Baltic and Siberian Mongoloid but they still classified the skull as Mongoloid.

2. The prove is that Uralics have good degree of Siberian Mongoloid proves their connection with Mongoloid.

3. You're wrong, modern Uralics are still 16.5 to 35.1% Mongoloid, so I wouildn't say almost fully if I were you that is significant.


Also one more thing that proves Uralic were originally Mongoloid is because Nenets have 75% haplogroup N1b but yet 65% Caucasian maternal DNA, if N1b was Caucasoid shouldn't the average Nenet look Caucasoid rather than extreme Mongoloid features?

http://www.lifeonthinice.org/data/photos/530_1nenets_01_14.jpg

[ButlerKing]

You still need to explain what is Caucasian about the Mongol in second picture?
Please don't chicken out.


Red hair? YES

Flat nose , small eyes, Mongoloid features? NO

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OrNBcqklX1s/Tu-o0d8VqkI/AAAAAAAAK4M/kfDg8nb9oos/s400/Red%2BHeaded%2BMen-011w.jpeg
http://24.media.tumblr.com/5ccd3696a481457df9562002c967fe40/tumblr_mnki9rkxvO1rj4b4zo1_500.jpg


When I look at him is like looking at this guy if he had dark hair/eyes. Flat nose, slanty eyes and hella mongoloid
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_lnrD8rvLMMM/SzOPQMb15PI/AAAAAAAAApY/vMncRq4R6N0/s400/DSC_0086.JPG
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg

[Smeagol]

Oldest Proto-Uralic by Russian anthropologist
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg


This guy could easily be mixed race, and even if he isn't, this one skull does not prove original Uralics were 100% Mongoloid. According to you this skull was found in the Baikal region anyway, and not Europe.

[ButlerKing]

This guy could easily be mixed race, and even if he isn't, this one skull does not prove original Uralics were 100% Mongoloid. According to you this skull was found in the Baikal region anyway, and not Europe.

easily mixed race? if that's mixed what the hell is a Mongoloid suppose to look like?

He look just like this Korean dude. The eyes, nose, lips, face all match.

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4051/asian9nn.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg

[ButlerKing]

As for the Baikal region, which is today in eastern Siberia. Like the Russians anthropologist said there was a eastern expansion of siberian tribes to the west.

[Smeagol]

easily mixed race? if that's mixed what the hell is a Mongoloid suppose to look like?

He look just like this Korean dude. The eyes, nose, lips, face all match.

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4051/asian9nn.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2w40mm9.jpg

But even if he was a pure Mongoloid...
1: One skull does not prove that all Uralics were 100% Mongoloid.
2: This skull was found in the Baikal region according to you so it only represents what Uralic speakers in Siberia looked like, not what they looked like in Europe. All the early crania in Europe is mainly Caucasoid with a few having Mongoloid admixture.

[Smeagol]

As for the Baikal region, which is today in eastern Siberia. Like the Russians anthropologist said there was a eastern expansion of siberian tribes to the west.

You mean like the Samoyeds?

[ButlerKing]

But even if he was a pure Mongoloid...
1: One skull does not prove that all Uralics were 100% Mongoloid.
2: This skull was found in the Baikal region according to you so it only represents what Uralic speakers in Siberia looked like, not what they looked like in Europe. All the early crania in Europe is mainly Caucasoid with a few having Mongoloid admixture.

1. Well the Russians did say the oldest was classified as Siberian/Mongoloid, there are others like him but I don't have pictures of them.

2. I didn't say western Uralics were Mongoloid but their ancestors were this is where Mongoloid comes from. And these Uralic speakers like udmurts and Komi would have been genetically identical to other Indo-Europeans group if it wasn't for their 16.5 - 35% Mongoloid admixture.

[ButlerKing]

You mean like the Samoyeds?


Yes something like that

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/25/PSM_V53_D767_Khirgiz_people_from_the_horde_of_buke e.png/430px-PSM_V53_D767_Khirgiz_people_from_the_horde_of_buke e.png

[Smeagol]

1. Well the Russians did say the oldest was classified as Siberian/Mongoloid, there are others like him but I don't have pictures of them.

Yes, the oldest in Asia, but so far all of the Uralic crania found in Europe is mostly Caucasoid.


2. I didn't say western Uralics were Mongoloid but their ancestors were this is where Mongoloid comes from. And these Uralic speakers like udmurts and Komi would have been genetically identical to other Indo-Europeans group if it wasn't for their 16.5 - 35% Mongoloid admixture.

But most of the Mongoloid admixture in the Komi, and Udmurts is Samoyedic, you showed me proof of that yourself in another thread, so without that recent Samoyed admixture, the Komi, and Udmurts would be nearly pure Caucasoids like the Finns, and Saami.

[ButlerKing]

West Siberian race

Russian translation


Recently, for the trans-Ural race options instead of the concept of "Ural race," suggested the concept of "West Siberian race" [12] . In this case, the Western Ural race options are Caucasoid race, but as part of the West Siberian race remains a population with slightly more Mongoloid appearance, common among the Khanty , Mansi , Narym Selkups , Tomsk Tatars and Chulyms [13] . West Siberian race consists of two physical types - Urals and the Ob-Irtysh [14] .

[ButlerKing]

Yes, the oldest in Asia, but so far all of the Uralic crania found in Europe is mostly Caucasoid.



But most of the Mongoloid admixture in the Komi, and Udmurts is Samoyedic, you showed me proof of that yourself in another thread, so without that recent Samoyed admixture, the Komi, and Udmurts would be nearly pure Caucasoids like the Finns, and Saami.


Who says that this Samoyedic admixture is recent? even today the Nenets with 75% N are genetically 56% Samoyedic with small numbers of different Mongoloid Siberian admixture.

The highest Samoyedic are among the eastern siberian race and they all look Mongoloid

[Smeagol]

Who says that this Samoyedic admixture is recent? even today the Nenets with 75% N are genetically 56% Samoyedic with small numbers of different Mongoloid Siberian admixture.

The highest Samoyedic are among the eastern siberian race and they all look Mongoloid

It is most likely recent, because the Samoyeds are recent arrivals into Europe, and even today the northern Komi are mixing with Samoyeds. It also explains why they have more Mongoloid admixture than Finns, or Saami.

[ButlerKing]

It is most likely recent, because the Samoyeds are recent arrivals into Europe, and even today the northern Komi are mixing with Samoyeds. It also explains why they have more Mongoloid admixture than Finns, or Saami.

You are mistaken my friend, the mixing happened a very long time ago. Like in the year 2000 BC in western Ural.

Samoyeds are too extremely few today to cause any significant admixture on Komi or udmurt.

[ButlerKing]

By American and Russian anthropologist


Russian translation to English


The assumption of these researchers confirmed the American anthropologist C. Turner, who established a physical relationship with the Maltese paleoevropeytsami (Cro-Magnons) in general and the people Kostenok Sungir and, in particular, [iv] . In Siberia paleoevropeytsy meet with local Mongoloid population in this medium, a Siberian Y-chromosome haplogroup N3, and in the end turn out to be like her native eastern paleoevropeytsy and Mongoloids. When mixed gone to Siberia paleoevopeytsev and Mongoloids, a so-called Ural racial type (medium-length head, broad and flat face, slightly protruding nose, often Mongolian skadka century.

In the European part of the cooling between 20 and 15 thousand years BC paleoevropeytsev forces to retreat to the south, but when cooling is completed in a span of from 10 to 6 thousand years BC paleoevropetsy re-settled in the north-east up to the coast of the Arctic Ocean, and occupy the entire central and northern Russian Plain.
T hese northeastern paleoevropeytsy protofinskom already speak English and are the most ancient ancestors of today's Finnish-speaking peoples.

Later, somewhere in the 4-5 millennium BC Siberians with haplogroup N3 beginning to return to the north-eastern Europe, carrying the Mongoloids, which then influenced to varying degrees by racial make protofinskih peoples. And now the Mongoloid peoples of these extremely varies - from Europoid Finnish-speaking peoples north-west and center of the Russian Plain, to a distinct Mongoloid peoples living closer to the Urals and the Arctic Ocean.
Should also be said about the Sami living in the north of Scandinavia and the Kola Peninsula. The Sami were formed as a mix of Mongoloids who came to this land in the 4-5 millennium BC of Western Siberia, and the site of ancient paleoevropeytsev, however, in contrast to the Finnish-speaking peoples share the Mongoloid ethnogenesis Sami is much more significant.


[I] Our story, written in DNA. N.K.Yankovsky, S.A.Borinskaya

[Ii] Okladnikov AP Siberia in the Stone Age. Paleolithic / / Ancient Siberia (Layout of Volume I of the "History of Siberia"). Ulan-Ude, 1964

[Iii] Okladnikov AP, Abramov ZA Pervonachalyyue development of Paleolithic man of Siberia and the Far East / / The primitive
man, his material kulgura and the natural environment in the Pleistocene. and Holocene, M., 1974.

[Iv] Christy G. Turner Child Upper Paleolithic Malta / / Math. SOAN USSR. Ser. hist., Philosophy and Philology. 1990 MY. 2

[V] Okladnikov AP Siberia in the Stone Age. Paleolithic / / Ancient Siberia (Layout of Volume I of the "History of Siberia"). Ulan-Ude, 1964.

[Smeagol]

You are mistaken my friend, the mixing happened a very long time ago. Like in the year 2000 BC in western Ural.

Okay, but then why do Komi, and Udmurts have more Mongoloid admixture than Finns, and Saami?


Samoyeds are too extremely few today to cause any significant admixture on Komi or udmurt.

Maybe, so but the north Komi have more Mongoloid admixture than the south Komi, and they have always been mixing with Samoyeds, even today they still are. Some eastern Saami have historically mixed with them too.

[Smeagol]

[SIZE=5]Should also be said about the Sami living in the north of Scandinavia and the Kola Peninsula. The Sami were formed as a mix of Mongoloids who came to this land in the 4-5 millennium BC of Western Siberia, and the site of ancient paleoevropeytsev, however, in contrast to the Finnish-speaking peoples share the Mongoloid ethnogenesis Sami is much more significant.

Saami are only 6% Mongoloid on average.

[ButlerKing]

Okay, but then why do Komi, and Udmurts have more Mongoloid admixture than Finns, and Saami?



Maybe, so but the north Komi have more Mongoloid admixture than the south Komi, and they have always been mixing with Samoyeds, even today they still are. Some eastern Saami have historically mixed with them too.

Why? because the ancestors of Finns and Saami are people like western Urals who mixed with native North Europeans. Their paternal ancestors came from people like Komi or Udmurt rather than someone that look like a Nenet but the original one look like a Nenet.

You make it sound as if this mixture is significant, the Samoyeds number less than 50,000 while the Saami are about 163,000. Also there is only a very few Nenet where the Saami lives.

[ButlerKing]

Saami are only 6% Mongoloid on average.

6-8% on average but smaller number also has 12-16%

Y-DNA is only a marker

One generation 50%
Two generation 25%
Three generation 12.5%
Four generation 6.25%
Five generation 3.15%

[Harkonnen]

Why? because the ancestors of Finns and Saami are people like western Urals who mixed with native North Europeans. Their paternal ancestors came from people like Komi or Udmurt rather than someone that look like a Nenet but the original one look like a Nenet.

You make it sound as if this mixture is significant, the Samoyeds number less than 50,000 while the Saami are about 163,000. Also there is only a very few Nenet where the Saami lives.

Well what are native North Europeans? According to latest MDLP spreadsheet southern Swedish Neolithic Funnelbeaker remains scored 30% on the Uralic component peaking in Samoyedic and Ugric (Khantymansy) speakers as well as in Saami folk. So this means that the Uralic component of Saami could very well be pre-Uralic native Scandinavian component.

[ButlerKing]

Well what are native North Europeans? According to latest MDLP spreadsheet southern Swedish Neolithic Funnelbeaker remains scored 30% on the Uralic component peaking in Samoyedic and Ugric (Khantymansy) speakers as well as in Saami folk. So this means that the Uralic component of Saami could very well be pre-Uralic native Scandinavian component.

Show me this paper, I don't believe you for a second.


In Patrilineage through the Y haplogroups of their DNA, the Swedes are most diverse and strongly of Haplogroup I1d1 in over 40% of the population tested in different studies, followed by R1a1a and R1b1a2a1a1 with over 20% each one and haplogroup N1c1 with over 5% at different regional variance. The rest are among haplogroups J and E1b1b1 and other less common ones.[72]


the mtDNA of swedish people are indistinguishable from people like Norwegians, Danish, Finns. However Danish lack these haplogroup N but their mtDNA is at least 90% similar to Finns and other north europeans as are their autosomal DNA minus the mongoloid admixture, only their Y-DNA are different.

http://www.clanstrachan.org/freespace/Haplogroup_I1.gif

[ButlerKing]

See Finns...... nearly 1/3 of their Y-DNA are haplogroup I however Finns speak a Uralic language while other North European don't, however their autosomal DNA and mtDNA are the exact similar. So Finns are closer to North Europeans than Uralic people.

With regard to the Y-chromosome, the most common haplogroups of the Finns are N1c (58%), I (29%), R1a (7.5%) and R1b (3.5%).[39] Haplogroup N1c, which is found only in a few countries in Europe (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland and Russia), is a subgroup of the haplogroup N (Y-DNA) distributed across northern Eurasia and estimated in a recent study to be 10,000–20,000 years old and suggested to have entered Europe about 12,000–14,000 years ago from Asia.[40]

[ButlerKing]

See even the Saami have 31% haplogroup I while the western Uralic people have low frequencies of I. For example udmurt 1.1%

[Harkonnen]

You have to be insane, even Russian anthropologist classified their skull as Mongoloid not Caucasoid

The problem is you do not have any source or real evidence to support your claim and I really do think you should double check your eyes if you still think that 6000 BC reconstruction look like some Caucasoid. None of the Uralic people you posted come close.

The first original Uralics were Mongoloid Finno Ugric people and later expanded to western Siberia and mixed with Dnieper-Donets culture and received have their Mongoloid admixture which created western uralic people

Dude let this be the last time you are making me repeat this. Dnieper-Donets mixed with CCC, meaning mesolithic people of North(eastern) Europe, you know the folk you choose to call Uralic. As far as I know CCC was not influenced by DD.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/European-middle-neolithic-en.svg
http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag125/kuuuukko/b1fgSQY_zpsec96b7aa.png
http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag125/kuuuukko/89931ba2-77d1-4f1c-8288-5532c97d7c1d_zpsae8f2692.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Dnieper-Donets were not uralic but Comb Ceramic was.

[Sky earth]

I'm not but-hurt about anything, for your information I am half Balkan Turkish. The difference between me and you is I am after the truth, you however mold history and genetics to fit your pan-Turkicist fantasies.



The 50% claim by Turkicworld is stupid, just like their ridiculous claim of how Bosnia was founded by Pechenegs (Besenyo in Hungarian). That website is full retard.

Obviously there is a Vainakh and maybe even also a Turkic substrate but it is no where near 50%. That doesn't change the fact that Sarmatian etchings from Olbia match those of modern Ossetic. Not to mention the Jassic people in Hungary.



Don't be pseudo-Scientific. Turkic =/= Iranic. Maybe next you will claim Magyars actually came from Sumer like the majority of Hungarians believe?



OoOo Mr.geneticist, nice links to wikipedia. Tell me do you have even the most basic of personal genome accounts (23andmee FTdna?). If not than why pretend to be an expert on genetics when you cannot comprehend concepts like founder effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect) and population bottleneck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck)?


Fair enough, some Scythians penetrated Turkic society and managed to acheive elite status, so? That still doesn't change the fact that the modal haplogroups associated with early Turks would have been Q and C, not R1a. R1a came from Europe, stop believing in conspiracy theories Mr.NWO.



The Sakha/Yakut is either a coincidence or maybe the Yakut were paying homage to a very small aspect of their ancestry. Either way it doesn't really matter.



Thanks for pointing that out captain obvious.



Cossack clothes = 100% from the Caucasus. You didn't know?



Stop rabidly defending "your people". You are only a tiny fraction Turkic by blood. Even Turkmens are not pure Turks but mostly just Persians, and considering Seljuks would have been almost identical to Turkmens, that makes you even less Turk because Seljuks force fed their language to the Armenian and Byzantine masses.

You seem to be a expert on the language of Ossetians:bored: Still doesn't change the fact the Ossetians are mostly native Caucasian haplogroup G2 carriers who adopted an Iranian language though 50 % of their language is non Indo-European

Of course according to you everything which is non Iranocentrists or non Indo-Europeanist is pseudo-science. How BORING!:bored: I've never claimed that Hungarians were descendants of ancient Sumerians. You're talking bullnuts again

Have you tested Proto-Turkic Kurgans Mr.Genetics or why do you think that the first Turks were Q and C carrierrs? Haplogroup R1a originated probably from Central Asia. Don't come with your eurocentric bullshit here!

Who gives a shit if their clothes comes from Caucasians?. Their military skills were from steppe peoples like Tatars or Mongols.

Sorry but weren't your ancestors the Celtiberian loosers who were fucked up by Roman conquests and adopted their language after that? I find actually stupid when you write in your Meta-Ethncitiy "Celtiberian" because you speak the language of your conquerers. If you like to be Celtiberian learn their language please. Turkmens are Persians lol:D. According to your stupid logic the sedentary Choresmian Iranians from ancient Turkmenistan fell in love with the steppe nomadic culture of Turkmens and adopted their language:picard2: The Choresmians were probably exterminated by the Mongol conquests when the ancient megacity Merv was destroyed. Afterwards the Oghuz Turks settled all over Turkmenistan though they were there before the Mongol conquests

[d3cimat3d]

You seem to be a expert on the language of Ossetians Still doesn't change the fact the Ossetians are mostly native Caucasian haplogroup G2 carriers who adopted an Iranian language though 50 % of their language is non Indo-European

All the R1a Alans of the northern plains are either dead or migrated to western Europe ages ago. Yes, Ossetians are for the most part Iranicized mountain people, finally something we can agree on.



50 % of their language is non Indo-European
Cite a source or gtfo.



Who gives a shit if their clothes comes from Caucasians?. Their military skills were from steppe peoples like Tatars or Mongols.

Yes, Cossack, Kazak, Kozak is a Kypchak word for "freeman", but remember, ultimately Tatar-Mongol millitary style traces back to Iranic Scythians. This is just a fact you will have to find a way around. I'm glad I can school you about Cossacks and their uniforms, let me know if you have any other questions, noob.



Sorry but weren't your ancestors the Celtiberian loosers who were fucked up by Roman conquests and adopted their language after that? I find actually stupid when you write in your Meta-Ethncitiy "Celtiberian" because you speak the language of your conquerers. If you like to be Celtiberian learn their language please.


Typical brain dead Seljuk, for the 3rd time I am not Iberian! My Avatar and stats are obviously a joke. I am 50% Balkan Turkish myself.


Turkmens are Persians lol. According to your stupid logic

You should not even be allowed to use the word logic, because that's something all of your posts lack, I mean that. Otherwise you wouldn't make dumb unscientific statements like this:


Haplogroup R1a originated probably from Central Asia. Don't come with your eurocentric bullshit here!


R1a diversity is not highest in central Asia, the entire continent is dominated by z93 branch of R1a, so it cannot originate their. R1a diversity is highest in Poland, but had the Pontic steppes not been cleansed by the Turkic hordes it would be highest there, in Ukraine.


the sedentary Choresmian Iranians from ancient Turkmenistan fell in love with the steppe nomadic culture of Turkmens and adopted their language The Choresmians were probably exterminated by the Mongol conquests when the ancient megacity Merv was destroyed. Afterwards the Oghuz Turks settled all over Turkmenistan though they were there before the Mongol conquests

Turkmens with their whopping 15% Siberian + East Asian is nothing like the REAL blood Turks like Tuvans who are 85% Siberian + East Asian:

http://i44.tinypic.com/15weahe.png

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedEY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEY lE#gid=0

You're such a hypocrite, you say Ossetians are just local people who shifted to Iranic languages, but you don't want to admit that Turkmens or even your own Anatolian Turks also local people who shifted languages.

[Demhat]

You seem to be a expert on the language of Ossetians:bored: Still doesn't change the fact the Ossetians are mostly native Caucasian haplogroup G2 carriers who adopted an Iranian language though 50 % of their language is non Indo-European


Bottleneck effect. Ossetian mtDNA is for example most similar to other Iranians which makes them at least 40-50% Alan.

[Sky earth]

All the R1a Alans of the northern plains are either dead or migrated to western Europe ages ago. Yes, Ossetians are for the most part Iranicized mountain people, finally something we can agree on.


Cite a source or gtfo.



Yes, Cossack, Kazak, Kozak is a Kypchak word for "freeman", but remember, ultimately Tatar-Mongol millitary style traces back to Iranic Scythians. This is just a fact you will have to find a way around. I'm glad I can school you about Cossacks and their uniforms, let me know if you have any other questions, noob.



Typical brain dead Seljuk, for the 3rd time I am not Iberian! My Avatar and stats are obviously a joke. I am 50% Balkan Turkish myself.



You should not even be allowed to use the word logic, because that's something all of your posts lack, I mean that. Otherwise you wouldn't make dumb unscientific statements like this:



R1a diversity is not highest in central Asia, the entire continent is dominated by z93 branch of R1a, so it cannot originate their. R1a diversity is highest in Poland, but had the Pontic steppes not been cleansed by the Turkic hordes it would be highest there, in Ukraine.



Turkmens with their whopping 15% Siberian + East Asian is nothing like the REAL blood Turks like Tuvans who are 85% Siberian + East Asian:

http://i44.tinypic.com/15weahe.png

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedEY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEY lE#gid=0

You're such a hypocrite, you say Ossetians are just local people who shifted to Iranic languages, but you don't want to admit that Turkmens or even your own Anatolian Turks also local people who shifted languages.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/27_Scythians/OssetianLanguageAbaev.htm
Of course according to your small brain that's a pan-Turanist website:D

There are many theories about the origin of the word Kazakh/Cossack. Some speculate that it comes from the Turkish verb "Qaz"(to wander), because the Kazakhs were wandering steppemen, or that it derives from the prototurkic word "khashaq" ( a wheeled cart used by Kazakhs to transport their yurts and belongings)

You're just a self hating half-Turk who licks the ass of Iranocentrists:D

A self hating Balkan-Turkish wannabe Indo-European Idiot like you shouldn't use the word logic:nono:

I'm not going to discuss the origins of Haplogroup R1a with you. Just read what most geneticist and scholars say about the origins of Haplogroup R1a. Your Eurocentric bullshit has no place here!

Agian a stupid moron who thinks that the Proto-Turks looked like Koreans.:picard1: Tuvans are heavily mixed with Mongolians just like ALL Turkic peoples are mixed with some other ethnicitiy. The Turks, Azerbaijanis and Turkmens are mostly mixed with Native Anatolians and Iranians. The Sakhas, Kazakhs and Kyrgyzes are mainly mixed with Mongolians and Tungusic peoples and the Tatars and Chuvahs are mostly mixed with Finno-ugric peoples and Slavs. Turkic people orignated in Central Asia and CA was a contact zone between caucasoids and mongoloids. The Proto-Turks were neither caucasoid nor mongoloid but they were a mix of both races. I think I said enough about the Scythians as it's pretty clear, except for stupid eurocentrists like you, that the Sakas in Central Asia were at least half Turkic

Look how the historians described the ancestors of the mainly mongoloid looking Kazakhs and Kyrgyzes:

The Kipchaks (known in Russian and Ukrainian as Polovtsy) were a tribal confederation which originally settled at the River Irtysh, possibly connected to the Kimäks. Anthropologist SA Pletnev studied a group of burials of Kipchaks in Volga region and found them to have Caucasoid features with some admixture of Mongoloid traits, with physical characteristics such as flat face and distinctly protruding nose. Many researchers also believe that Kipchaks were blond and blue-eyed, descended from the Dingling, who lived in the steppes of Southern Siberia in the end of the 1st millennium BC, and who were, according to the Chinese chroniclers, blonds. They were joined by Cumans, who had originated east of the Yellow River, and in the course of the Turkic expansion they migrated into Siberia and further into the Trans-Volga region, enventually occupying a vast territory in the Eurasian steppe, stretching from north of the Aral Sea westward to the region north of the Black Sea, establishing a state known as Desht-i Qipchaq. The Cumans expanded further westward, by the 11th century reaching Moldavia, Wallachia, and part of Transylvania.

The Cumans' name in Russian and German means "yellow", in reference to the color of the Cumans' hair. The Ukrainian word Polovtsy (Пóловці) means "blond", since the old Ukrainian word polovo means "straw". Kuman means "pale yellow" in Turkic. Some authors put forward the idea that the name Polovtsy referred to "men of the field, or of the steppe" (from the Ukrainian word pole: open ground, field), not to be confused with polyane (cf. Greek polis: city). In Slavic languages the word 'polyane' literally means "open ground, field". According to O. Suleymenov polovtsy came from a word for "blue-eyed", since the Serbo-Croatian word plav means "blue": the Eastern Slavic equivalent would take the regular form *polov.

Let's look what the Arabs have said about the anthropology of the Turkic Khazars:

It has been estimated that from 25 to 28 distinct ethnic groups made up the population of the Khazar Qağanate, aside from the ethnic elite. The ruling elite seems to have been constituted out of nine tribes/clans, themselves ethnically heterogeneous, spread over perhaps nine provinces or principalities, each of which would have been allocated to a clan. In terms of caste or class, some evidence suggests that there was a distinction, whether racial or social is unclear, between "White Khazars" (ak-Khazars) and "Black Khazars" (qara-Khazars). The 10th-century Muslim geographer al-Iṣṭakhrī claimed that the White Khazars were strikingly handsome with reddish hair, white skin, and blue eyes, while the Black Khazars were swarthy, verging on deep black, as if they were "some kind of Indian". Many Turkic nations had a similar (political, not racial) division between a "white" ruling warrior caste and a "black" class of commoners; the consensus among mainstream scholars is that Istakhri was confused by the names given to the two groups. However, Khazars are generally described by early Arab sources as having a white complexion, blue eyes, and reddish hair. The name of the presumed founding Āshǐnà clan itself may reflect an etymology suggestive of a darkish colour. The distinction appears to have survived the collapse of the Khazarian empire. Later Russian chronicles, commenting on the role of the Khazars in the magyarization of Hungary, refer to them as "White Ugrian" and Magyars as "Black Ugrians".

[ButlerKing]

Turkmens with their whopping 15% Siberian + East Asian is nothing like the REAL blood Turks like Tuvans who are 85% Siberian + East Asian:

This is why people should look at autosomal DNA charts instead of making judgments from the average sample.

You can be 15% on average from 3 out 20 samples and still have 17 out 20 who range 25-56% Mongoloid

http://i46.tinypic.com/2nsqvbt.png

[d3cimat3d]

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/27_Scythians/OssetianLanguageAbaev.htm
Of course according to your small brain that's a pan-Turanist website:D


It is largely pan-Turanist and just plain retarded. This for example:
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/KangarsTableOfContents.htm



A self hating half Balkan-Turkish wannabe Celtiberian. You can only meet people like you in the Apricity. That's the reason I love this forum:D

Look hypocrite, you should not be accusing me of self hate when you are ashamed of your Anatolian heritage so much that you have to go and pretend you are some Turkic bogatyr str8 from central Asia. Turks refusing to admit that they are Armenians, Greeks and Kurds who shifted over to the Seljuk language is the biggest symptom of self hate.

Only a hypocrite like you will say Ossetians are Iranified local people, yet at the same time deny Turks are Turkified Anatolians.

It's only a matter of time before your but-hurt Turkish friends will arrive and start thanking your semi-retarded posts, so lets finish this before they come.



A self hating Balkan-Turkish wannabe Celtiberian idiot like you shouldn't use the word logic:nono:

All my posts are logical and based off scientific data, including Dienekes dodecad project. You however are all about your "feelings", you are not capable of logical thought processes. You only pick and choose what you like to hear.



I'm not going to discuss the origins of Haplogroup R1a with you. Just read what most geneticist and scholars say about the origins of Haplogroup R1a. Your Eurocentric bullshit has no place here!

Most reputable geneticists seem to agree R1a came from eastern Europe somewhere, and before that the near-east. However their are a few crackpot people like you who believe in wild theories like India, Pamirs, etc.



Agian a stupid moron who thinks that the Proto-Turks looked like Koreans.:picard1: Tuvans are heavily mixed with Mongolians just like ALL Turkic peoples are mixed with some other ethnicitiy.

Turkic is in the Altaic language family just as Mongolic, so if Mongols were not Caucasoid than the first Turkic people were not either.
Summon some of your Greek ancestry and think about it logically for a minute, retard.


The Proto-Turks were neither caucasoid nor mongoloid they were a mix of both races. I think I said enough about the Scythians as it's pretty clear, except for stupid Indo-Europeanists like you, that the Sakas in Central Asia were at least half Turkic

"At least half Turkic"? What the fuck does that even mean, Turkic is a language family so either you are Turkic or you're not. I'm not Eurocentrist about anything, I am looking at this from the objective neutral point of view in search of reality no matter how much I don't like it, you however need to take off your Turuk glasses and stop being such a biased little bitch.


Look how the historians described the ancestors of the mainly mongoloid looking Kazakhs and Kyrgyzes:



Turkified (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_shift) Scythians-Sarmatians, obviously.



This is why people should look at autosomal DNA charts instead of making judgments from the average sample.

You can be 15% on average from 3 out 20 samples and still have 17 out 20 who range 25-56% Mongoloid

http://i46.tinypic.com/2nsqvbt.png

SOURCE? Than this proves Anatolian Turks are even less Turkic that before.

[ButlerKing]

SOURCE? Than this proves Anatolian Turks are even less Turkic that before.

Someone posted it from Forumbiodiversity so I don't know where the source is but I also have no reason to doubt it. I can show you several sources where Turkish Mongoloid ranges 5- 18%. In my opinion 13-56% Mongoloid DNA only is too generous. for a mere 15% when nearly 2/10 of Turkmen look like Mongoloid people.

Trying to convince people that a mere 15% East Asian can result in Turkmen that look like this is hilarious and stupid.


http://www.unicef.org/turkmenistan/TUKA_nutrition_1.JPG
http://bwalton.com/rebecca/schoolingoeka.jpg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/02/05/Foreign/Images/AP12020419731.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_6XNnfi0qrkU/TRpOGCE8G0I/AAAAAAAACK8/mag-Kjl-DHM/s640/TUMENHBRS_image0017.jpg
http://files.myopera.com/baiulgen/gallery/turkmen.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Turkmen from Turkmenabat clearly different to Turkmen from the south. So there is no way these are only 15% East Asian, even Turkish with 15-18.5% Mongoloid DNA do not look like these.

http://turkmenabat.veppa.com/photos/i22.jpg
http://img.youtube.com/vi/AL28SpA7D5o/0.jpg
http://blog.treeinlodge.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/SSCN9866.jpg

[Sky earth]

It is largely pan-Turanist and just plain retarded. This for example:
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/KangarsTableOfContents.htm



Look hypocrite, you should not be accusing me of self hate when you are ashamed of your Anatolian heritage so much that you have to go and pretend you are some Turkic bogatyr str8 from central Asia. Turks refusing to admit that they are Armenians, Greeks and Kurds who shifted over to the Seljuk language is the biggest symptom of self hate.

Only a hypocrite like you will say Ossetians are Iranified local people, yet at the same time deny Turks are Turkified Anatolians.

It's only a matter of time before your but-hurt Turkish friends will arrive and start thanking your semi-retarded posts, so lets finish this before they come.



All my posts are logical and based off scientific data, including Dienekes dodecad project. You however are all about your "feelings", you are not capable of logical thought processes. You only pick and choose what you like to hear.



Most reputable geneticists seem to agree R1a came from eastern Europe somewhere, and before that the near-east. However their are a few crackpot people like you who believe in wild theories like India, Pamirs, etc.



Turkic is in the Altaic language family just as Mongolic, so if Mongols were not Caucasoid than the first Turkic people were not either.
Summon some of your Greek ancestry and think about it logically for a minute, retard.



"At least half Turkic"? What the fuck does that even mean, Turkic is a language family so either you are Turkic or you're not. I'm not Eurocentrist about anything, I am looking at this from the objective neutral point of view in search of reality no matter how much I don't like it, you however need to take off your Turuk glasses and stop being such a biased little bitch.



Turkified (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_shift) Scythians-Sarmatians, obviously.




SOURCE? Than this proves Anatolian Turks are even less Turkic that before.

I'm not ashamed of my Anatolian heritage and most Turks realize that they're mainly a mix between the native Anatolians and the Oghuz Turkic newcomers. Turks from Aydin have even nearly the same amount of Mongoloid admixture in aDNA like the Turkmens in Turkmenistan. Some Turks from Aydin and other parts of Turkey have even 20-22% Mongoloid admixture. For racist pathetic people like you genetics must be the most important thing in life but the truth is that language and culture is the most important thing for a nation.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3EPNodkspCw/Tz1c0Rnh1dI/AAAAAAAAEgc/vbK2_7THyVs/s1600/blowup.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rcdkNaYFICM/Tz1p4IcLlZI/AAAAAAAAEhs/En5H2fWIh68/s1600/ADMIXTURE+Turkish_Aydin_Ho_3.png


Your posts are full of self hatred and eurocentric bullshit like your brain:icon_yes:

Precisely not! Most geneticst agree with it that R1a originated in Central Asia

Why am I not surprised that you don't know a FUCK about language families? The MAJORITY of linguists don't believe in an Altaic language family. They say that the Turkic and Mongolic languages are NOT genetically related to each other. It's probably a Sprachbund

A sprachbund (/ˈsprɑːkbʊnd/; German: [ˈʃpʁaːxbʊnt], "federation of languages") – also known as a linguistic area, area of linguistic convergence, diffusion area or language crossroads – is a group of languages that have become similar in some way because of geographical proximity and language contact. They may be genetically unrelated, or only distantly related. Where genetic affiliations are unclear, the sprachbund characteristics might give a false appearance of relatedness. Areal features are common features of a group of languages in a sprachbund.

The ONLY bitch here is you. Calm down and take your pills!

It was too obvious that you would come with language shift. Those Eastern Iranics must fell in love with Turkic languages. All of them decided to speak Turkic languages after they had contact wth them:D Even the Kipchaks are turkified Scythians know:picard2:

[d3cimat3d]

Someone posted it from Forumbiodiversity so I don't know where the source is but I also have no reason to doubt it. I can show you several sources where Turkish Mongoloid ranges 5- 18%. In my opinion 13-56% Mongoloid DNA only is too generous. for a mere 15% when nearly 2/10 of Turkmen look like Mongoloid people.

Trying to convince people that a mere 15% East Asian can result in Turkmen that look like this is hilarious and stupid.



Great cherry picking as always ButlerKing, I can cherry pick too:

http://i42.tinypic.com/168d4l1.jpg

^Turkmens are predominately west-Asian, basically Kwarezem Iranians with some Mongoloid. Even genetics agrees they are somewhere in between Uzbeks and Iranians:

http://i42.tinypic.com/i35s3p.png

^Trm = Turkmen. Even less Mongoliod than the Iranic speaking Tajiks! ButlerQueen = owned.



The ONLY bitch here is you. Calm down and take your pills!


At least I do not believe in the occult or new world order, conspiracy nut job.

[ButlerKing]

Great cherry picking as always ButlerKing, I can cherry pick too:

http://i42.tinypic.com/168d4l1.jpg

^Turkmens are predominately west-Asian, basically Kwarezem Iranians with some Mongoloid. Even genetics agrees they are somewhere in between Uzbeks and Iranians:

http://i42.tinypic.com/i35s3p.png

^Trm = Turkmen. Even less Mongoliod than the Iranic speaking Tajiks!


You call me cherry picking, but I didn't deny that most Turkmen look West Asian or also similar to Tajiks in DNA. However many of them are also 30-56% Mongoloid and that is where their East Asian face comes from

Your 15% East Asian comes from only one study from southern turkmenistan.



If I was cherry picking I would have used only a few individuals not a group of them

http://www.orexca.com/images/fotogallery/img_full/1321696031_4174.jpg

[d3cimat3d]

^ Yes those look 15% Mongoloid.


For racist pathetic people like you genetics must be the most important thing in life


Ok so supporting a European origin for R1a makes me a racist? UR an idjit.

[ButlerKing]

^ Yes those look 15% Mongoloid.

And this guy happens to be 50% Koreans

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lq64taZriY1qiswego1_500.jpg

[ButlerKing]

If they are only 15% than some Turkish should have looked like this by now.

http://www.stantours.com/pics/tm_gal_peo_bek_girls_00.gif
http://static.flickr.com/54/131686942_80f6420542.jpg?v=0
http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1436/1305972490_31c7abf361.jpg

[d3cimat3d]

^ I happen to know a Korean-German mix and he is distinctly Asian looking.
Kazakhs are half and half yet still look almost 100% Mong. I don't think you realize how strong Mong genes are.

[ButlerKing]

^ I happen to know a Korean-German mix and he is distinctly Asian looking.
Kazakhs are half and half yet still look almost 100% Mong. I don't think you realize how strong Mong genes are.

Kazakhs are 70% Mongoloid

And I happen to know many Eurasians who look more white than Asian.

How about you look at this. Turkmen, Uzbeks, Uyghurs = Eurasians


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX7sHqfStL8

[ButlerKing]

Well isn't this strange?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TJCuJVizYSI/AAAAAAAAClY/KT6PkWSIZnM/s1600/centralasianmartinez.jpg
FOR DNA

Blue represent European admixture
Green represent Middle eastern admixture
Orange represent Central/South Asia admixture ( around Tajkistan / Afghanistan/ Kashmir )
Red represent east Asian admixture

FOR LINGUISTIC

Purple represents Indo-Iranian languages
Yellow represents Turkic languages




-----------------------------------------


Uzbeks who speak Turkic languages ( 3 groups )

Ethnically Uzbeks who speak Turkic languages only.


East Asian 49.3% + Europe 23.6% + Middle east 2.1% + Central/South Asia 25%

East Asian 46.4% + Europe 23.9% + Middle east 2.4% + Central/South Asia 27.4%

East Asian 28.6% + Europe 27.1% + Middle east 19.2% + Central/South Asia 25%

[ButlerKing]

I though Turkmen were only 15% East Asian..... why is it than in this study it shows them as 27.2% Mongoloid on average?

Turkmen in Uzbekistan ( 1 group )

East Asian 27.2% + Europe 27.1% + Middle east 23.6% + Central/South Asia 22.1%

[d3cimat3d]

I though Turkmen were only 15% East Asian..... why is it than in this study it shows them as 25.2% Mongoloid on average?

Turkmen in Uzbekistan ( 1 group )

East Asian 27.2% + Europe 27.1% + Middle east 23.6% + Central/South Asia 22.1%

Well they certainly aren't "30-56%" Mongoloid like you said earlier:


Turkmen look West Asian or also similar to Tajiks in DNA. However many of them are also 30-56% Mongoloid and that is where their East Asian face comes from


Using Turkmens from Uzbekistan to prove the mong-ness of Turkmens proper is stupid. The majority of Turkmens are from the southern part of the country anyway:

http://i44.tinypic.com/2z8q236.jpg

Here's another image from that study you posted. Even Uzbek-Turkmens are still clustering with Iranians and far from east Asia:

http://i41.tinypic.com/fvurfl.jpg

Turkmens proper from Turkmenistan would cluster even closer to the west than Turkmens living in Uzbekistan.

[ButlerKing]

Well they certainly aren't "30-56%" Mongoloid like you said earlier:



Using Turkmens from Uzbekistan to prove a point, nice. The majority of Turkmens are from the southern part of the country anyway:

http://i44.tinypic.com/2z8q236.jpg

Here's another image from that study you posted. Even Uzbek-Turmens are still clustering with Iranians and far from east Asia:

http://i41.tinypic.com/fvurfl.jpg

Turkmens proper from Turkmenistan would cluster even closer to the west than Turkmens living in Uzbekistan.

You seem to think that a average study can represent the whole population. Uzbeks cluster between Iranians and Mongol, their slightly closer to Iranian but that still doesn't make them Iranian in any way.

While Turkmen depending on the region can higher or lower Mongoloid DNA.


http://i50.tinypic.com/2inluu.jpg

Apparently they aren't as close to Iranian as you think

http://karakalpak.com/images/genetic00.jpg

[d3cimat3d]

http://i50.tinypic.com/2inluu.jpg



Looks 15% alright. :nod

[ButlerKing]

Here, try this. Turkmen from Afghanistan and Pakistan

Don't even claim that I am cherry picking, these are only pics you can find

http://i47.tinypic.com/xf94rc.jpg
http://i48.tinypic.com/2vx3j8l.jpg


Now compare with Turkmen in southwest of the country

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/p480x480/563785_556677851018873_1178941780_n.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Looks 15% alright. :nod

And do you know why is only 15%? Southern part of Turkmenistan used to be a slave market for Iranians. Turkoman captured Iranian slaves to Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.

" A notorious slave market for captured Russian and Persian slaves was centred in the Khanate of Khiva from the 17th to the 19th century.[82]During the first half of the 19th century alone, some one million Persians, as well as an unknown number of Russians, were enslaved and transported to Central Asian khanates.[83][84] When the Russian troops took Khiva in 1898 there were 29,300 Persian slaves, captured by Turkoman raiders. According of Josef Wolff (Report of 1843–1845) the population of the Khanate of Bukhara was 1,200,000, of whom 200,000 were Persian slaves "

The 15% is one study that came from the capital city of Turkmenistan. It only became the capital after the end of the soviet union.

[ButlerKing]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_Asia#Central_Asia_and_the_Ca ucasus

Here, History of slavery of Central Asia and Caucasus

Now where do you suppose these 1 million Iranian slaves became later on? did they became Turkified or mixed with Turkic people?

[rashka]

Talking about Slaves.

Afghanistan


"The country generally between Caubul (Kabul) and the Oxus appears to be in a very lawless state; slavery is as rife as ever, and extends through Hazara, Badakshan, Wakhan, Sirikul, Kunjūt (Hunza), &c. A slave, if a strong man likely to stand work well, is, in Upper Badakshan, considered to be of the same value as one of the large dogs of the country, or of a horse, being about the equivalent of Rs 80. A slave girl is valued at from four horses or more, according to her looks &c.; men are, however, almost always exchanged for dogs. When I was in Little Tibet (Ladakh), a returned slave who had been in the Kashmir army took refuge in my camp; he said he was well enough treated as to food &c., but he could never get over having been exchanged for a dog, and constantly harped on the subject, the man who sold him evidently thinking the dog the better animal of the two. In Lower Badakshan, and more distant places, the price of slaves is much enhanced, and payment is made in coin."

In response to the Hazara uprising of 1892, the Afghan Emir Abdur Rahman Khan declared a "Jihad" against the Shiites. His large army defeated the rebellion at its center, in Oruzgan, by 1892 and the local population was being massacred. According to S. A. Mousavi, "thousands of Hazara men, women, and children were sold as slaves in the markets of Kabul and Qandahar, while numerous towers of human heads were made from the defeated rebels as a warning to others who might challenge the rule of the Amir". Until the 20th century, some Hazaras were still kept as slaves by the Pashtuns; although Amanullah Khan banned slavery in Afghanistan during his reign,the practice carried on unofficially for many more years.

Crimean Khanate

In the time of the Crimean Khanate, Crimeans engaged in frequent raids into the Danubian principalities, Poland-Lithuania, and Muscovy. For each captive, the khan received a fixed share (savğa) of 10% or 20%. The campaigns by Crimean forces categorize into "sefers", officially declared military operations led by the khans themselves, and çapuls, raids undertaken by groups of noblemen, sometimes illegally because they contravened treaties concluded by the khans with neighbouring rulers). For a long time, until the early 18th century, the khanate maintained a massive Slave Trade with the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East. Caffa was one of the best known and significant trading ports and slave markets. Crimean Tatar raiders enslaved more than 1 million Eastern Europeans.

Central Asia and the Caucasus

Russian conquest of the Caucasus led to the abolition of slavery by the 1860s and the conquest of the Central Asian Islamic khanates of Bukhara, Samarkand, and Khiva by the 1870s. The Russian administration liberated the slaves of the Kazakhs in 1859. A notorious slave market for captured Russian and Persian slaves was centred in the Khanate of Khiva from the 17th to the 19th century. During the first half of the 19th century alone, some one million Persians, as well as an unknown number of Russians, were enslaved and transported to Central Asian khanates. [/B]When the Russian troops took Khiva in 1898 there were [B]29,300 Persian slaves, captured by Turkoman raiders. According of Josef Wolff (Report of 1843–1845) the population of the Khanate of Bukhara was 1,200,000, of whom 200,000 were Persian slaves. At the beginning of the 21st century Chechens and Ingush kept Russian captives as slaves or in slave-like conditions in the mountains of the northern Caucasus.

Indian subcontinent

Slavery in India is evidenced since ancient times. Manu the Lawgiver, in his Manu Smriti lists seven different kinds of slaves.The nature of slavery in India was extremely complex and cut across boundaries of caste, gender, kin, religion, and role.

The early Arab invaders of Sind in the 8th century, the armies of the Umayyad commander Muhammad bin Qasim, are reported to have enslaved tens of thousands of Indian prisoners, including both soldiers and civilians. In the early 11th century Tarikh al-Yamini, the Arab historian Al-Utbi recorded that in 1001 the armies of Mahmud of Ghazna conquered Peshawar and Waihand (capital of Gandhara) after Battle of Peshawar (1001), "in the midst of the land of Hindustan", and captured some 100,000 youths. Later, following his twelfth expedition into India in 1018–19, Mahmud is reported to have returned with such a large number of slaves that their value was reduced to only two to ten dirhams each. This unusually low price made, according to Al-Utbi, "merchants [come] from distant cities to purchase them, so that the countries of Central Asia, Iraq and Khurasan were swelled with them, and the fair and the dark, the rich and the poor, mingled in one common slavery". Elliot and Dowson refers to "five hundred thousand slaves, beautiful men and women.". Later, during the Delhi Sultanate period (1206–1555), references to the abundant availability of low-priced Indian slaves abound. Levi attributes this primarily to the vast human resources of India, compared to its neighbours to the north and west (Mughal Indian population being approximately 12 to 20 times that of Turan and Iran at the end of the 16th century).

Arab slave traders also brought slaves as early as the 1st century AD from Africa. Most of the African slaves were brought, however, in the 17th century and were taken into Western India. The Siddi people are of mainly East African descent.

Much of the northern and central parts of the subcontinent was ruled by the so-called Slave Dynasty of Turkic origin from 1206 to 1290: Qutb-ud-din Aybak, a slave of Muhammad Ghori rose to power following his master's death. For almost a century, his descendants ruled presiding over the introduction of Tankas and building of Qutub Minar.

According to Sir Henry Bartle Frere (who sat on the Viceroy's Council), there were an estimated 8,000,000 or 9,000,000 slaves in India in 1841. In Malabar, about 15% of the population were slaves. Slavery was officially abolished in India by the Indian Slavery Act V. of 1843. Provisions of the Indian Penal Code of 1861 effectively abolished slavery in India by making the enslavement of human beings a criminal offense.

Selling a child slave in Central Asia - By Vasily Vereshchagin
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%B6%D0%B0_%D1%80% D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B8%D 0%BA%D0%B0.jpg

[Sky earth]

Great cherry picking as always ButlerKing, I can cherry pick too:

http://i42.tinypic.com/168d4l1.jpg

^Turkmens are predominately west-Asian, basically Kwarezem Iranians with some Mongoloid. Even genetics agrees they are somewhere in between Uzbeks and Iranians:

http://i42.tinypic.com/i35s3p.png

^Trm = Turkmen. Even less Mongoliod than the Iranic speaking Tajiks! ButlerQueen = owned.



At least I do not believe in the occult or new world order, conspiracy nut job.

Turkmens and Tajiks have always nearly the same amount of mongoloid admixture in all aDNA studies but Turkmens are still more mongoloid admixed on average than Tajiks

In this spreadsheet Turkmens have 16,3% Mongoloid while Tajiks have 15,3% mongoloid admixture

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyN nc&authkey=COCa89AJ&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0

PS: You're also too stupid to realize that my stats are JOKES

[Sky earth]

Turkmens and Tajiks have always nearly the same amount of mongoloid admixture in all aDNA studies but Turkmens are still more mongoloid admixed on average than Tajiks

In this spreadsheet Turkmens have 16,3% Mongoloid while Tajiks have 15,3% mongoloid admixture

[url]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyN nc&authkey=COCa89AJ&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0[/url


PS: You're also too stupid to realize that my stats are JOKES

[rashka]

Cabul in 1972 (I guess it was spelt with a C in those days)
http://tundratabloids.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/kabul-in-72.jpg

[Blackout]

he said he was well enough treated as to food &c., but he could never get over having been exchanged for a dog, and constantly harped on the subject, the man who sold him evidently thinking the dog the better animal of the two.

lol!!! I find this hard to believe, have certainly never heard of stuff like this happening. Do you have any sources at hand? :)


I guess it was spelt with a C in those days)

It's the way the french spell it, i think.

[Proto-Shaman]

^ I happen to know a Korean-German mix and he is distinctly Asian looking.
Kazakhs are half and half yet still look almost 100% Mong. I don't think you realize how strong Mong genes are.

Sorry, but your weird opinion is not of interest here at all. Genetics refute your wet dreams:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/The_history_and_geography_of_human_genes_Luigi_Luc a_Cavalli-Sforza_map_genetic.png

The color map of the world shows very distinctly the differences that we know exist among the continents: Africans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroid) (yellow), Caucasoids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasoid) (smaragd green), Mongoloids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid), including American Indians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian) (purple), and Australian Aborigines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australoid) (red). The map does not show well the strong Caucasoid component in northern Africa, but it does show the unity of the other Caucasoids from Europe, and in West, South, and much of Central Asia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

approximate overview:http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/2564/racesr.jpg

[Proto-Shaman]

Though the video I posted may be pan-Iranicist, it's clear you are a pan-Turanist which is not any better. Saka is the Persian equivalent of Skolotoi - the Greek word for Scythians, there's nothing Turkic about it. The Saka people disappeared from history because they either were absorbed by the Gokturks or migrated to Europe under the ethnonym Sauromatian.

http://encyclopediaindica.com/index.php/Turushka
http://www.encyclopediaindica.com/index.php/Saka
http://encyclopediaindica.com/index.php/Kushana
http://encyclopediaindica.com/index.php/Kshatriya
http://www.encyclopediaindica.com/index.php/Kanishka

[d3cimat3d]

Sorry, but your weird opinion is not of interest here at all. Genetics refute your wet dreams:
The cpg[/IMG]

Oh the guy who doesn't even know his own haplogroup wants to school me on genetics, great. :)

How does your maps dis-prove anything I said about Kazakhs being a 50-50 mix? Actually they are leaning a bit more towards the Mongoloid side. :icon_yes:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2niy92c.png

http://i42.tinypic.com/2a4sqop.jpg

http://magnusducatus.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-component-maps-of-mdlp-world22.html

[ButlerKing]

Well isn't this strange. Uyghurs and Hazaras are 50/50 Mongoloid/Caucasoid and they look so much more Caucasoid than Kazakh on average

http://i48.tinypic.com/2b9ugn.jpg

[Proto-Shaman]

Oh the guy who doesn't even know his own haplogroup wants to school me on genetics, great. :)

How does your maps dis-prove anything I said about Kazakhs being a 50-50 mix? Actually they are leaning a bit more towards the Mongoloid side. :icon_yes:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2niy92c.png

http://i42.tinypic.com/2a4sqop.jpg

http://magnusducatus.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-component-maps-of-mdlp-world22.html
Far away from 100% mongoloid, your trollish behaviour is annoying.

[d3cimat3d]

^ What the hell are you talking about? I never said Kazakhs were 100% Mongoloid, quite the opposite actually:


^ I happen to know a Korean-German mix and he is distinctly Asian looking.
Kazakhs are half and half yet still look almost 100% Mong. I don't think you realize how strong Mong genes are.

It's not my fault your comprehension of the English language is poor.

[ButlerKing]

Oh the guy who doesn't even know his own haplogroup wants to school me on genetics, great. :)

How does your maps dis-prove anything I said about Kazakhs being a 50-50 mix? Actually they are leaning a bit more towards the Mongoloid side. :icon_yes:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2niy92c.png




http://i42.tinypic.com/2a4sqop.jpg

http://magnusducatus.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-component-maps-of-mdlp-world22.html



How does this map proves your right? it missed out the southeast Asian and East Asian components which is present in Kazakh about 15-20%. For example Uzbeks have 20% East Asian.
http://i48.tinypic.com/2b9ugn.jpg

[Proto-Shaman]

^ What the hell are you talking about? I never said Kazakhs were 100% Mongoloid, quite the opposite actually:

It's not my fault your comprehension of the English language is poor.
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?90089-Where-did-proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers-ancestry-orignate/page11&p=1831660#post1831660
http://i.imgur.com/BWBxz.jpg

[Sky earth]

Well isn't this strange. Uyghurs and Hazaras are 50/50 Mongoloid/Caucasoid and they look so much more Caucasoid than Kazakh on average

http://i48.tinypic.com/2b9ugn.jpg

There is only ONE Kazakh sample in all aDNA studies as yet. I doubt that the Kazakhs are on average 40:60% Caucasoid/Mongoloid. Kazakhs are certainly 30:70% Caucasoid/Mongoloid on average like the Kyrgyz.

[ButlerKing]

Exactly, with the way these Kazakhs look. 50/50 or 40/60 is unlikely.

http://www.kyivpost.com/media/images/2012/09/06/p176e7uuo119egqsm1kevf7k1qs44/big.jpg

[d3cimat3d]

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?90089-Where-did-proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers-ancestry-orignate/page11&p=1831660#post1831660
http://i.imgur.com/BWBxz.jpg

I'd like to see you try.

http://i41.tinypic.com/orlzeu.jpg

Anyway it's getting kind of exhausting taking on 3 ignorant people at the same time. I'm out

[Formozgan]

And do you know why is only 15%? Southern part of Turkmenistan used to be a slave market for Iranians. Turkoman captured Iranian slaves to Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.

" A notorious slave market for captured Russian and Persian slaves was centred in the Khanate of Khiva from the 17th to the 19th century.[82]During the first half of the 19th century alone, some one million Persians, as well as an unknown number of Russians, were enslaved and transported to Central Asian khanates.[83][84] When the Russian troops took Khiva in 1898 there were 29,300 Persian slaves, captured by Turkoman raiders. According of Josef Wolff (Report of 1843–1845) the population of the Khanate of Bukhara was 1,200,000, of whom 200,000 were Persian slaves "

The 15% is one study that came from the capital city of Turkmenistan. It only became the capital after the end of the soviet union.

Turkmenistan also was home of Soghdians, Transoxanians, Parthians, etc... It's clear to know where most of their older ancestry comes from. Turkmens in Iran or Turkmenistan look predominantly Caucasoid:

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/05RDanAa9xaU0/610x.jpg

http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/3/TurkP.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Turkmenistan also was home of Soghdians, Transoxanians, Parthians, etc... It's clear to know where most of their older ancestry comes from. Turkmens in Iran or Turkmenistan look predominantly Caucasoid:

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/05RDanAa9xaU0/610x.jpg

http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/3/TurkP.jpg

But not all of them do, the ones in Afghanistan and Pakistan look heavily Mongoloid. Turkmen and Azeris had lots of intermarriages. These Caucasoid looking could just be the result that many Eurasians can turn out as Caucasoid despite being 25-50% Mongoloid

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-esXGjNX_2DM/TgddaM9QWjI/AAAAAAAABI0/s0aJVR4kDdk/s200/IMG_1988.JPG
http://altaic-wiki.wikispaces.com/file/view/Turkmengirlandbaby.jpg/76033475/388x418/Turkmengirlandbaby.jpg
http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/34012/AZIZI_KHODADAD_jpg.jpg
http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1436/1305972490_31c7abf361.jpg
http://i46.tinypic.com/4t3pr8.jpg

[Demhat]

There were some saying that Bashlik the word being Turkic would prove anything. Well in fact it only means that Western scientist were introduced to these hats by Turkic speakers just like it is unlikely that grave mounds which are called Kurgans and found throughout Eurasia (all the way to Celts) are of Turkic origin more likely introduced to scientist by this name when they were first examined in Central Asia.


Anyway just for the record the term Saka is of Iranian origin and means something like Nomad in old Achamaenid.

About the origin of Turkic tribes there are many hypothesis which I don't want to go into detail or start a discussion. Fact is that they show characteristic of both, Iranian (mostly cultural and genetic) and Altaic-Mongo (linguistic and also genetic) tribes.

[Proto-Shaman]

Anyway just for the record the term Saka is of Iranian origin and means something like Nomad in old Achamaenid.
Maybe because Sakas were called like many other peoples nomad in ancient Iranian sources :)


About the origin of Turkic tribes there are many hypothesis which I don't want to go into detail or start a discussion. Fact is that they show characteristic of both, Iranian (mostly cultural and genetic) and Altaic-Mongo (linguistic and also genetic) tribes.
The SNP-data reveals a Caucasoid origin of Turks. This means they are of Iranic origin?

[Formozgan]

The SNP-data reveals a Caucasoid origin of Turks. This means they are of Iranic origin?

At least partially. It was Indo-European speaking groups who roamed the steppes before, and at the same time Turkic peoples. Other source is Tocharians.

[Proto-Shaman]

None at all. Q emerged from the depths of Siberia when the Turko-Mongols burst on the scene. R1a is exclusively Indo-Iranian, all tested I-I remains to date have been R1a.
Good that newer studies like Underhill et al. 2014 (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg201450a.html) proved the opposite :picard1:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=52556&d=1416847379


There was some intermarriage, but mostly ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. There's a reason why in ancient times Iranian people dominated central Asia but now only the high mountains of Tajikistan is where they found safe haven from the genocidal Turkic hordes.
Thank God genetics exist! xD

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=52557&d=1416847379

[Proto-Shaman]

Butlerking what real evidence do u have genghis kahn has red hair and green eyes. Also there was tons of indo Iranian speakers migrations all over asia from 5,000-3,500ybp. 3,400 and 3,000 year old tarium mummies of almost defintley indo Iranians had red hair the sycthians who dominated most of central asia in the iron age were uselly described and blue eyed and red hair or fair haired. the Tocherians aka Yuezhia who lived in west china mainly i think around 500-700ad were described by ancient Chinese writers i saw this on Wikipedia and a documentary as tall, having high noses, red and blonde hair with big beards, and huge blue eyes. The 4,000 year old tarium mummies in west china were very early indo Iranians and their y dna was R1a1a (probably R1a1a1b2 but they did not test that far) and they had mainly Mongliod mtDNA C4 they were a total mix of European and east asia.

So in south Siberia, west china, and Mongolia there has been inter marriage with very light haired indo Iranians since over 4,000ybp. There is no doubt that is why sometimes east Asian looking people in that area will have blue eyes or other non east asian features. It is true that Monglionan and central Siberian people do have a little European blood more than any other east asians but no way do they have a significant amount of European. Genghis Kahn was probably a typical looking east asian person. And who cares if he did have red hair i guess that is interesting but we know why it is Indo Iranian tribes.
Speculative mainstream theory is confronted with a few problems:

• Chinese sources about red-haired Turkic tribes.
• Turanid skulls of most Tarim mummies.
• Turkic R1a, R1b and P-M45.

[Proto-Shaman]

N as much as P is not possible to be classified as either Caucasian or East Asiatic. Some N sub clades are Caucasian other Mongolid just like R is Caucasian though being related to Q and even among Q some clades are Caucasian other are Siberian or Native American. The Proto Uralic speakers were most likely Caucasian with some genetic ties to Mongolids, since they belong to Haplogroups with ties to Mongolids, just like West Asian, South Asian and North European autosomal Genes do. Also autosomal DNA of Uralic speakers is pred Caucasian.
This is correct. The first Caucasoids appeared with the haplogroup F from their journey through the middle east and is kindred with the Mongoloid haplogroup C.

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=52559&d=1416851786

Caucasoid features continued to exist among the haplogroup NOP untill it diverged into N (Uralic, Siberian Turkic), O (Chinese etc.), and P (Indo-Europeans, Turkics, Native Americans).