They originated from North East Europe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Printable View
They originated from North East Europe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Ancient Mongols loved ancient Turks and willingly assimilated among them. All present-day Turkic people are partly Mongols.Quote:
Originally Posted by mutabor
:)
Dude, they destroyed your ancestrors' statehood - Volga Bulgaria. It was a Muslim state which was destroyed by the pagan savages. Modern Tatars are around 80% European/West Eurasian, identifying with Genghis Khan is ridiculous, it's basically 'we wuz kangz and shit, we konquered you Slav(e)s, we wuz da masters'. Volga Tatars have more Finno-Ugric ancestry than Mongolian and are generally closer to Russians genetically than to Mongols.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
Have you seen Mongols looking like Ilsur Metshin, the mayor of Kazan?
http://zampolit.com/upload/iblock/35...a7ab7626cf.jpg
My threads with actual DNA results, no goddamn speculations!
Mongolian GEDmatch results
Volga Tatar GEDmatch
Kazan was very rich and prosperous city in Golden Horde until Russians conquered it. Since then Kazan turned into provincial city and lost its glory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Tatarstan is actually one of the strongest regions of Russia economically. Nice try.Quote:
Originally Posted by mutabor
They rejected Mongolian love and were punished.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
I saw a couple of autosomal tests of Tatars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Their European component is modeled as a mix of Baltic people + Western Slavs + Balkan people and perhaps has no recent Finno-Ugric origin and goes back to the local Iron Age - Bronze Age
Well, Finno-Ugric is a linguistic term, there's no such race as Finno-Ugric. It's a group of mutually unintelligible languages and some prehistoric genetic connections such as the N haplogroup. Before the Bulgars migrated to the Middle Volga after the 600s AD, the region was presumably populated by FU-speaking groups. The Chuvash speak a language the most closely related to that of the Volga Bulgars, as far I know. Modern Tatar is a Kipchak language adopted after the Mongol invasion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
No, Tatar language represents a mixture of two Turkic dialects (with initial "j" and initial "y").Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Those who have an initial "j" - seem to be of Bulgarian origin. Those who have initial "y" are descendants of Kipachak/Kuman/Nogai
A Mishar Tatar 'academic' sample on GEDmatch: Z022368
There is a lot of Tatar kits on GM, I myself had around 100. This forum is not very interested in actual data, more in baseless speculations.
MDLP K23b Oracle results:
Kit Z022368
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1 European_Hunters_Gatherers 42.75
2 Caucasian 22.08
3 East_Siberian 8.14
4 Ancestral_Altaic 7.96
5 South_Central_Asian 6.68
6 Near_East 3.64
7 Tungus-Altaic 3.61
8 Austronesian 1.34
9 North_African 1.2
10 Australoid 0.96
11 Amerindian 0.62
12 Arctic 0.6
13 Melano_Polynesian 0.33
14 South_East_Asian 0.08
15 European_Early_Farmers 0.01
Single Population Sharing:
# Population (source) Distance
1 Tatar_Mishar ( ) 2.11
2 Tatar ( ) 7.47
3 Tatar_Kryashen ( ) 7.92
4 Tatar-Kazan ( ) 8.05
5 Vepsa ( ) 8.33
6 Russian-North ( ) 8.58
7 Russian_Vologda ( ) 8.72
8 Tatar-Mishar ( ) 8.94
9 Karelian ( ) 9.61
10 Erzya ( ) 9.7
11 Russian-Ural ( ) 9.73
12 Chuvashs ( ) 9.91
13 Komi ( ) 10.42
14 Tatar_Lithuania ( ) 11.7
15 Estonian ( ) 11.76
16 Moksha ( ) 11.92
17 Mordovian ( ) 12
18 Russian-Upper-Volga ( ) 12.05
19 Saami_Kola ( ) 12.09
20 Chuvash ( ) 12.13
Mixed Mode Population Sharing:
# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 99% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1% Adjara ( ) @ 1.99
2 98.8% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.2% Ossetian ( ) @ 2
3 99.1% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 0.9% Georgian_Svan ( ) @ 2
4 99.1% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 0.9% Georgian_Tbilisi ( ) @ 2
5 98.7% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.3% North_Ossetian ( ) @ 2
6 98.5% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.5% Yemenite_Jew ( ) @ 2
7 99.1% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 0.9% Abkhasian ( ) @ 2.01
8 98.7% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.3% Chechen ( ) @ 2.01
9 98.7% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.3% Kabardin ( ) @ 2.01
10 99.2% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 0.8% Georgian_Imereti ( ) @ 2.01
11 98.8% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.2% Balkar ( ) @ 2.01
12 99.1% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 0.9% Georgian_Megrelia ( ) @ 2.01
13 98.5% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.5% Avar ( ) @ 2.01
14 99.1% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 0.9% Georgian ( ) @ 2.01
15 98.4% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.6% Lak ( ) @ 2.01
16 98.4% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.6% Dargin_Urkarah ( ) @ 2.01
17 98.5% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.5% Lezgin ( ) @ 2.01
18 99% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1% Kakheti ( ) @ 2.01
19 98.5% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.5% Baku_WGA ( ) @ 2.02
20 98.8% Tatar_Mishar ( ) + 1.2% Adygei ( ) @ 2.02
Scythians were said to be very light skinned and light haired in contrast to the Greeks in ancient Greece. And also, in the area that is Kazakhstan, ancient Greeks named their population "savromatae" as far as I am aware, meaning serpent-eyed, in contrast to Scythae, who were the Scythians and according to folk mythology was a Greek-Amazon tribe.
ancient greeks also mentioned extreme ugliness of sarmatians as their characteristic in ancient textsQuote:
Originally Posted by Basileus
All these patterns on cotton and silk fabrics perhaps spread throughout Siberia not earlier than 1-2 millennia BC or much later with Chinese silk.Quote:
Originally Posted by mutabor
I think it's a bad idea to date this process by neolithic times.
Chinese dress:
https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/get-p...566fe295/s1200
Scythians were light skinned light haired white iranic peoples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basileus
Face reconstructions:
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/4f/c2/77/4...831aaeee4f.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/84/3c...17b785c33d.jpg
Tatars are closer to north-western Finnic than to Volga Finnic - Erzya, Udmurt, Mari. This is expected, given the differences in haplogroups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Original iranic (aryan) race type:
http://humanphenotypes.net/ProtoNordid.html
I found a description of look of Kypchaks and Uigurs in the 15th (!) century in Chinese sources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kis_Kócos
It found in comments to the law governing marriage unions (including with foreigners)
Ming Dynasty Laws:
http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokume...frametext5.htm
Comments:
http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokume...rimtext5.phtml
google translate:
Chinese racists!!!Quote:
123 . Uighurs and Kipchaks are the most ugly among the Samuzhen ... Uigurs have curly hair and a big nose, Kipchaks have yellow hair and blue eyes. Their appearance is ugly and different [from ours], so ... it happens that the Chinese do not want to marry them.
Do you know why? Check this out:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan#Proto-Indo-Iranian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tocharians
According to haircut a Manchurian warrior dress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
You are one of the most equipped people in this forum,I admire you (for now), but this comment is not true.
Quote:
. Before we proceed any further, we should consider the controversy related to the "flickering" pronunciation of the famous Turkic initial J-/y-, which becomes particularly unstable when it comes to the Kimak-Kypchak-Tatar subtaxon. [We should remind again that /J-/ herein transcribes a consonant approximately similar to the English .] As we have mentioned in the beginning, Proto-Kimak partly lost its original Proto-Kimak-Kyrgyz word-initial *J-, which began to mutate into y-, although this transition has never been conclusive throughout the Kimak languages. For instance, *J- survives in Karachay-Balkar; whereas in Kazan Tatar it was preserved before- i- (hence Kazan Tatar Jir "earth", Jil "wind"), but changed to y- before other vowels (hence Kazan Tatar yafraq "leaf", yul "road", yïlan "snake", yörek "heart"). On the other hand, *J- also survives in the dialects of North Crimean Tatar in all positions.
Hence, apparently the Old Russian zhenchug' "pearl" (first attested c. 1160) and Hungarian /JönJi/, etc., originally from Chinese, but most likely borrowed from Cuman-Polovtsian (the latter belong to the Kimak subtaxon) [though an earlier borrowing from Bulgaric cannot be completely excluded].
Besides that, Mahmud al-Kashgari claimed that there existed a y- > J- or ' [zero or an Arabic hamza] mutation both in Oghuz and Kypchak.
For example, the Turks [=Karakhanid Turks] call a traveler yalkin, whereas they [Oghuz and Qifchaq] call him 'alkin. The Turks call warm water yilig suw, whereas they say ilig with the 'alif. Likewise, the Turks call a pearl yinchu, whereas they call it Jinchu. The Turks call the long hair of a camel yigdu, whereas they call it Jugdu. [Diwanu l-Lugat al-Turk (c. 1073)]
The Uguz and Kifzhak say the words beginning with y- as J-: ul mani Jatti (he reached me) instead of yatti. At-turk say suvda yundum (I bathed in water), whereas they [Oghuz and Qifchaq] say Jundum. Amongst the Turks and the Turkman, there exists this constant rule. [Diwanu l-Lugat al-Turk (c. 1073)]
Despite this quote, al-Kashgari also confusingly cites a good dozen of Oghuz words beginning with the y-, as if, either what he had said earlier no longer applied to them, or the reader was supposed to make the y-to-J substitution for himself. Consequently, the reader is left to wonder whether it's a mistake or a dialectical or allophonic variation. Neither is it clear why /J-/ is mostly absent from the modern Oghuz languages, such as Standard Turkmen. However, at a closer look, we find out that /J-/ exists in many dialects of Turkmen, specifically, Karakalpak Turkmen, and as the /J-/ > /d'-/, /t'-/ mutation in Saryk, Yomud, Ersar dialects of Turkmen [see Sravnitelnaya gramatika tyurkskikh yazykov. Fonetika (1984) p. 261 ], which makes al-Kashgari claims more plausible.
The allophonic variations between J- and y- are also reported in East Bashkir [proficient speakers (2011)], and many other Kimak-Kypchak-Tatar languages.
Conclusions:
It seems that the J-/y- were interchangeably used both in the early Oghuz and Kimak-Kypchak-Tatar languages. Both the former and the latter still retain wobbly allophonic usage, which varies across different dialects. The real life pronunciation, which may differ from textbook or written fixation, as well as multiple allophonic variations add more plausibility to Mahmud al-Kashgari's account.
Quote:
. The hypothesis of Proto-Kyrgyz and Proto-Oghuz interaction
We know from historical records that starting from 552 AD some of the Great-Steppe tribes were subdued by the Göktürks, who, essentially, were the speakers of Orkhon-Oghuz-Karakhanid. Presumably, the Göktürk language-dialect must have acquired a high sociolinguistic status in many Turkic-speaking societies of the time. We also know that Oghuz, that belongs to the Orkhon-Oghuz-Karakhanid grouping, and Kimak, that belong to the Great-Steppe grouping, share multiple similar phonological, lexical and grammatical innovations. Finally, we know that the Kyrgyz-Kazakh subgrouping (or Karluk-Kyrgyz-Kazakh subgrouping, as long as we assume that Karluk tribes were close to Kyrgyz tribes) is particularly close to Kimak.
Consequently, we can infer that somewhere around c. 500-800 AD there occurred a strong linguistic exchange between the early Oghuz and Kyrgyz dialects which could have resulted in the formation of Proto-Kimak. Moreover, the most simple and probable hypothesis which would explain the relatedness between Proto-Oghuz, Proto-Kimak, and Proto-Kyrgyz-Kazkah, would be that the area of Proto-Kimak was originally just a transitional geographic area between early Proto-Kyrgyz-(Karluk) and Proto-Oghuz, where these two languages overlapped and intermingled with each other.
The plausible hypothesis would be that, initially, Proto-Kyrgyz-Karluk (or Proto-Kyrgyz) was probably a conservative Turkic language located north of the Irtysh, between the Irtysh and Ob rivers, essentially in the area known as the Baraba and Kulunda Steppe, also possibly including some areas of the Altai Mountains.
The overlapping of Kyrgyz with the Oghuz area soon resulted in the formation of a new transitional dialect, which became known in history as Kimak. This Kimak area shared archaic linguistic features both with Kyrgyz-Karluk, on one hand, and innovative features with the early Oghuz, on the other.
Furthermore, Oghuz too was affected by Kimak and Kyrgyz dialect-languages; it absorbed some of their elements, becoming part of the Great Steppe Sprachbund, thus deviating from its Orkhon-Karakhanid parent stem.
On the other hand, the speakers of Kyrgyz-Karluk were largely unaffected by Göktürk dialect-languages because it was buffered in the Kimak area. Consequently, they may have formed a linguistic refugium near the Altai Mountains. Afterwards, according to scanty historical evidence, the early Kyrgyz and Karluk languages seem to have formed as a result of a later migration from the Altai Mountains towards the Tarbagatai Ridge, and the Zhetti-Su (the Seven Waters) region located between Lake Balkhash and the Tian Shan Mountains. This migration must have occurred most likely between 630-750 AD, thus creating the basis for the early Karluk and, probably, for the Kyrgyz (of Kyrgyzstan) languages. It was perhaps the political turmoil in the Western Turkic Kaganate, which allowed the Karluks to seize power in the Zhetti-Su area by about 766. In 840, there was likely to be a second wave of Kyrgyz migration to the Zhetti-Su (sources?) that ended political domination of the Karluks and apparently brought the name of "Kyrgyz" to the present-day Kyrgyzstan.
Conclusions:
As the Western Göktürk tribes speaking a language similar to the early Old Uyghur moved back from Mongolia into the upper reaches of the Irtysh river c. 550-700 AD, they came into contact with the local western Proto-Kyrgyz tribes. This intermingling must have resulted in the formation of three local dialectal areas:
(1) the Proto-Kyrgyz (possibly including Proto-Karluk) area that was almost unaffected by the Göktürk language and which ultimately led to the emergence of Karluk, Tian-Shan Kyrgyz, and finally, much later, after the 15th century, Kazakh and Karakalpak people;
(2) the northern Proto-Kimak area that was strongly affected by Oghuz or Western Göktürk, but retained many older Kyrgyz elements, such as -w- in bawïr "liver", and -w in taw "mountain", as opposed to the -G- and -G in the oncoming Orkhonic (Oghuz) language), to name just the most typical ones;
(3) the southern Proto-Oghuz area which acquired certain features from Kimak, but otherwise remained relatively unaffected, retaining many Orkhon-Karakhanid archaisms from an older period.
In other words, the formation of the three subtaxa — Proto-Karluk-Kyrgyz-Kazakh, Proto-Kimak-Kypchak-Tatar, and Proto-Oghuz-Seljuk — could have been the result of a back-migration of Western Göktürks or Orkhon Old Turkic or Old Uyghur or Oghuz speakers into the Kazakhstan Great Steppe from the Dzungarian Desert, eastern Tarim Basin or nearby regions, and their linguistic exchange with the local Kyrgyz or Karluk tribes
The above post is complete and utter bs. Classifying languages based on j and y variations. The Turkish author of that unpublished article claims that old Turkic is y and Turkish is y therefore Turkish or rather Oghuz how he puts it, is decedent of Old Turkic. LOL. Maybe it is time to publish old Turkic dictionary in Turkey, because old Turkic or rather Tukue Türk tongue used both initials j and y.
Now let's cut to the core. Old Turkic, Orkhon Uighur and Yenisei Kirghiz (essentially dialects of the same language) are dead languages with no direct successors. The closest language would probably be Tuvan, but it is not a descendant of old Turkic but a descendant of the language of Chiks, who due to their proximity spoke a very similar language. Qipchaq "language" is a complete scientific construct, no language data, no written material, it is only assumed they spoke some sort of Turkic language which they probably did with many dialectical variations, but due to numerous pre-Mongol era, Mongolic loanwords in Russian, at least some of tribal elements of Qipchaqs or Kumans must have been Mongolic, which is not surprising given that Turkics and Mongolics have been mixing way before Ghengis Khan. And certainly medieval "Qipchaqs" did not constitute a single people, more like terms Scythian or Türks (medieval ones, not ancient) covering a lot of different people with different origins. Karakhanid tongue or Türki is a branch of Tukue Türk language, but not its direct descendant, one can call it old Karluk to make things easy, but there were more than dozen different groups, not only Karluks. Orkhon Uighur and old Uighur are two different languages, one is language of monuments in Mongolia, and the other the language of documents found in Kucha-Tufan-Qumul area. The old Uighurs who came to Xinjiang and Gansu switched to local Turkic languages in these respective areas, and Orkhon Uighur died out just like old Turkic and eventually Yenisei Kirghiz.
There seems to be no strict system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryuk
It seems the literary norm prescribes different pronunciation based on one of the Tatar dialects. At the same time, there extreme dialects exists based mainly on one pronunciation .
I cannot refer to opinion of expert, I read the opinion of a person who is well knowing various Tatar dialects, as well as other Turkic languages. His opinion is : a fusion of different dialects.
You can see this situation in this dictionary.
http://tatar.com.ru/dict/jj.php
Quote:
jyalt : see the yalt
Lol!Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeroostah
Turkey Turks have very little Mongolian ydna admixture. I guess Mongols killed women they raped here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
Central Asian peoples have always been of interest to me to study. What are Kazakhs confirmed to be? Caucasian ot mongoloid/East Asian? Do they look white?
What does a typical Kazakh look like?
Excuse me for my ignorance.
Probably because western Turco-Mongol khaganates had a Mongolic ruling class and a body of commoners that's largely formed by Turkic clans. The further you move away from the Mongolian heartland, the less likely you will see actual Mongols in their own hordes. They just can't seem to be bothered with migrating westwards so they would had to rely on Turkic clansmen. And Medieval Mongols weren't purely C-M130 either.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalach
I find Turkish nationalists' admiration for Mongols cucked.Quote:
Originally Posted by porpozontokonto
Players that seem native or mixed in Kazakhstan's national men's soccer team (excluding players who were missing a photo):Quote:
Originally Posted by Illyrius
https://i.imgur.com/9kUPYa3.jpg
Morph of all 12:
https://i.imgur.com/ChxZrcQ.jpg
Women from photos classified as being of Kazakhs in Kunstkamera (some persons might be included multiple times, and some might not actually be Kazakh):
https://i.imgur.com/8PEEUAC.jpg
My friend Laag is not a fan of Kazakhs or Uzbeks, but I think that at least phenotypically, they are far superior to kebab-type Turks.
Again your mongol loving attitude. The best Mongols for me Native Americans lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ymyyakhtakh
Also from the comments: "120. Сэмужэнь - букв. «люди с цветными глазами» - в период Юань общее название для представителей западных, немонгольских народностей, которыми чаще всего были выходцы из Центральной и Средней Азии."Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
Translation: "120. Semuzhen - letters. "People with colored eyes" - during the Yuan period, the common name for representatives of Western, non-Mongolian peoples, who most often came from Central Asia."
However according to Wikipedia, the name is not actually derived from "colored eyes" but from "assorted categories" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semu):
Semu (Chinese: 色目; pinyin: sèmù) is the name of a caste established by the Yuan dynasty. The Semu categories refers to people who come from Central and West Asia, it is told that there are 31 categories among them. They had come to serve the Yuan dynasty by enfranchising under the dominant Mongol caste. The Semu were not a self-defined and homogeneous ethnic group per se, but one of the four castes of the Yuan dynasty: the Mongols, Semu (or Semuren), the "Han" (Hanren in Chinese, or all subjects of the former Jin dynasty, Dali Kingdom and Koreans) and the Southerners (Nanren in Chinese, or all subjects of the former Southern Song dynasty; sometimes called Manzi). Among the Semu were Buddhist Turpan Uyghurs, Tanguts and Tibetans; Nestorian Christian tribes like the Ongud; Alans; Muslim Central Asian Persian and Turkic peoples including the Khwarazmians and Karakhanids; West Asian Arab, Jewish and other minor groups who are from even further west.
[...]
Contrary to popular belief among both non-Chinese and Chinese, the term "Semu" (interpreted literally as "color-eye") did not imply that caste members had "colored eyes" and it was not a physical description of the people it labelled. It in fact meant "assorted categories" (各色名目, gè sè míng mù), emphasizing the ethnic diversity of Semu people.[1]
Aleksandr Marochkin is a Kazakhstan Russian, not an ethnic Kazakh. Looks part Asian but I guess that's okay for Siberian/Ural Russians (Northern Kazakhstan used to be an extension of Siberia before the Soviet nation-building)
https://img.uefa.com/imgml/TP/player.../250112789.jpg
https://media.gettyimages.com/photos...e-id1148746282
Thin Nordic features and light pigmentation plus Asian chinky eyes.
Regarding the question, the Kazakhs are not the same as the Mongols autosomally. Khalkha Mongols are 80-90% East Eurasian while Kazakhs are 55-65%. Sure they have a lot of shared ancestry but then again, the Turkic homeland was located somewhere in modern Mongolia, at least partially. Do not be confused by Y DNA data, the Kyrgyz are 50-60% R1a-Z93 for example.
Are you talking about /q/ (voiceless uvular stop)?Quote:
Originally Posted by mutabor
According to eurasianphonology.info, /q/ is also included in these languages:
Indo-Iranian: Lemi Chin, Khowar, Shughni, Rushani, Khufi, Sarikoli, Yazghulami, Kalam (Swat-Dir) Kohistani, Wotapuri-Katarqalai, Domari, Southern Pashai, Kalkoti, Kumzari, Dari, Sorani
Caucasian: Adyghe, Dargwa, Hinuq
Semitic: Kuwaiti Arabic, Barwar Neo-Aramaic, Betanure Neo-Aramaic, Arbel Neo-Aramaic, Amədya Neo-Aramaic, Alqosh Neo-Aramaic
Isolate: Burushaki
Output of `curl http://eurasianphonology.info/static/phono_dbase.json|jq -r '.[]|.name+": "+(.cons|join(" "))'|grep ' q '`:
Spoiler!
I didn't exclude him because I thought he might be a Russian-Kazakh mix. How do you know he's not mixed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Turanids also have "thin Nordic features" like a fairly long and narrow face and nose. Humanphenotypes.net says that Turanids have an "oval head and high mid face".
Here the Kazakh morph has a longer mid-face and shorter forehead, so its eyes are positioned higher on the y-axis:
https://i.imgur.com/akOaSjZ.gif
In the GIF file above, if you imagine drawing a triangle between the center point of each eye and the center point of the mouth, the shape of the triangle is more elongated in the Kazakh morph, because its eyes are more close-set and positioned higher.
In the case of Aleksandr Marochkin, the shape of the eyes-mouth-triangle is extremely elongated:
https://i.imgur.com/6LrXthc.jpg
This player in Kazakhstan's national team (Islambek Kuat) also has light-colored hair and eyes, even though his name is obviously not Russian. His eyes are less chinky, but he still has a very high midface-to-forehead ratio:
http://kff.kz/uploads/images/2019/03...c58_avatar.jpg
Islambek may be mixed with something too. Even though Kazakhstan is gradually becoming more homogenous, it's still a multiethnic country and besides Russians and Kazakhs there are other smaller ethnic minorities. Anyone who is interested can google it.
I'm not interested in the pseudo-scientific taxonomy stuff, people who in 2020 disregard population genetics in favor of "taxonomy" shouldn't bother arguing with me.
Are Albanians indeed turkified Caucasoids
Baktiyor Zainutdinov is ethnic Uzbek.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ymyyakhtakh
https://i.imgur.com/77PERkq.jpg
How do you know and why do you care? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenka
Most of them look just like my Chinese bros from Sichuan. Beware of those guys, hun, they look deceptively young, but they're kinda smart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenka
Because Kazakhs give the name Baktiyar, while Bakhtiyor is the Uzbek version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Why do you care why I care?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
:confused:
First of all, I wasn't even replying to you. Second of all, it's just info, and there's nothing wrong with informing people. This is an anthroforum. What I just wrote is not any more irrelevant than the stuff you write on the forum. Most people may not care about what that guy's ethnicty is, but neither would they care about what a Kazakh football team morph looks like, which is what Ymyyakhtakh posted in the thread, but you didn't ask him why he cares. Nor do most people care about genetics, but you have like thousands of posts on where someone plots or how much Siberian someone scores on GEDmatch. So rather than asking me "why do you care?" maybe you should know your place and ask yourself first.