Genetic results of Scythians and comparisons

[AndarKhan]

All tables are prepared by using Gedmatch MDLP K23B.

First Example
Aldy-Bel(Arzhan2)
7th-6th centuries B.C.

Results:

Y-DNA: R1a-s441
mtDNA: A

Comparisons:


This example similiar to modern predominantly caucasoid Turkic groups and modern Tadjiks. Also, this example is not similiar to other modern Iranic groups.

Second Example
Pazyryk(Berel11)
4th-3rd centuries B.C.

Results:

Y-DNA: R1a-Z93
mtDNA: C4a1

Comparisons:


This example is similiar to modern predominantly mongoloid Turkic groups. Also, this example is not similiar to any modern Iranic groups.

Source of tables: http://www.haplogruplar.com/iskitler...ilastirilmasi/

[Peterski]

[Kamal900]

They're still Iranic, not Turkic. These Scythians are not representatives on how they were genetically and racially were since these Scythians had admixed with local neo-Mongoloid women of Siberia and Mongolia which is how the Turkic peoples emerged.

[AndarKhan]

They're still Iranic, not Turkic. These Scythians are not representatives on how they were genetically and racially were since these Scythians had admixed with local neo-Mongoloid women of Siberia and Mongolia which is how the Turkic peoples emerged.

They were NOT Iranic. There is nothing that proves it. Also many historians said they were Turkic(maybe with another ethnic groups).

[Pahli]

They were NOT Iranic. There is nothing that proves it. Also many historians said they were Turkic(maybe with another ethnic groups).

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry:

Now stop wasting our time with your poor science learned in low quality Turkish universities:


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 47.19
2 West_Asia 24.04
3 SW_Europe 13.65
4 Siberia 6.75
5 South_Asia 3.11
6 Americas 3.02
7 NE_Asia 1.25
8 SE_Asia 0.98

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tatar 13.67
2 Chuvash 18.02
3 Mordovian 18.65
4 Moldavian 20.39
5 Ukrainian 20.91
6 Slovak 21.29
7 Russian 21.49
8 Aluet 22
9 Slovene 22.5
10 Belarusian 22.63
11 Bosnian 22.88
12 Hungarian 23.42
13 German_North 23.45
14 Croatian 24.21
15 Polish 24.37
16 Romanian 24.4
17 Serbian 24.51
18 Montenegrin 25.27
19 Norwegian 25.31
20 Scottish 25.69

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62.3% Mordovian + 37.7% Tadjik @ 7.16
2 51.8% Latvian + 48.2% Tadjik @ 7.24
3 51.9% Lithuanian + 48.1% Tadjik @ 7.38
4 58.5% Russian + 41.5% Tadjik @ 7.41
5 67.8% Mordovian + 32.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 7.44
6 50.3% Tadjik + 49.7% Finnish @ 7.58
7 50.8% Chechen + 49.2% Finnish @ 7.66
8 52.7% Estonian + 47.3% Tadjik @ 7.72
9 70.3% Mordovian + 29.7% Pathan @ 7.93
10 69.6% Mordovian + 30.4% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 8.08
11 64.4% Russian + 35.6% Afghan_Pashtun @ 8.18
12 73.7% Mordovian + 26.3% Makrani @ 8.21
13 73.2% Mordovian + 26.8% Balochi @ 8.25
14 74% Mordovian + 26% Brahui @ 8.3
15 62.3% Mordovian + 37.7% Chechen @ 8.39
16 55.2% Polish + 44.8% Tadjik @ 8.43
17 50.2% Kumyk + 49.8% Finnish @ 8.44
18 55.7% Finnish + 44.3% Dagestan_Azeri @ 8.53
19 53.7% Finnish + 46.3% Adygei @ 8.73
20 67% Russian + 33% Pathan @ 8.81

They might be closest to Tatars but the distance to them is still quite big, they are still slightly more West Eurasian shifted than Tatars.

[AndarKhan]

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry.

No. Many Linguists said their language were Turkic like Mordtmann, Zekiyev etc. Also genetically and culturally they were Turkic. You must leave your Indo-European fantasies.

[Pahli]

No. Many Linguists said their language were Turkic like Mordtmann, Zekiyev etc. Also genetically and culturally they were Turkic. You must leave your Indo-European fantasies.

They weren't Turkic at all lmfao, look at the plots, they come out mostly as 50/50 Baltic + Central Asian Iranic

I am also fairly sure that the majority of linguists and other scientists have closed the book regarding their language, they were nothing like ancient Turks that were 100% East Eurasian. I cannot imagine what the world would be with Turkish scientists in the lead

[archangel]

Off course they were Türks,they are our forefathers.

Lol at iranians claims the Scythians with their south asian apperance.

Scythians were hardcore steppe people

[Pahli]

Off course they were Türks,they are our forefathers.

Lol at iranians claims the Scythians with their south asian apperance.

Scythians were hardcore steppe people

Turks came ages after Scythians, you look like nothing like them neither do you Anatolian Turks have any ancestry from them

R.I.P science with Turks

[Mr. Anybody]

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry:

nicht immer. turks originated as a african (subsaharan) ancestry..dont know you?