Ugrofinian lingua franca...

**Turul Karom** · 09-12-2017, 12:58 PM

You can download YDNA analysis for FREE in the supplementary materials: Online Resource 2 (ESM_2): Results of Y-chromosome SNP typing using the GenoY25 assay (XLSX 16 kb)
Two of the conqueror graves were R1b U106.

I asked you to source it so we could read about the presence of our haplogroups in the conqueror graves, and you did. The controversy is where?

And interesting how you are fast to post part about supposed central asian/siberian influence in Hungarians (which is not more than in other central-eastern Europeans), but not the other part of the text: ''Another genetic layer of the early Hungarians was obtained during their westward migrations by admixing with various populations of European origin, and an important component of these was derived from the Caucasus region. ''

This still does not refute what I am saying, but rather enforces it. My quotes talked about modern Hungarians still show this presence, and I have stated in multiple threads, and multiple times in this thread, that it is to be expected for Hungarians to pick up cultural, genetic and linguistic aspects as they traveled west.Your statement corroborates this. How is it that I am able to state the point multiple times and you not hear it? Do you have selective listening? Must we go back to your own sources where I have noted their admissions for the genetic and cultural impacts of Turkic peoples?

And it cleary show how ancient Árpád's people were not Europeans in genetical sense, despite modern Hungarians are. What does it tell you ? ))''Most of the modern populations, which are genetically closest relatives of ancient Hungarians, today speak non-Indo-European languages.''

It means we do not have any siginificant ancestry from them, dear Turulka. Deal with it.

You can only speak for yourself in this matter. Do you also not think they are Hungarians, but some Turkic peoples who imposed cultures, languages, but not genetics on us? I have Anatolian Turkish sources I will be more than happy to share with you as well. Mostly from Buusra.

Originally Posted by Stears

Turul was defeated in the great debate (post number 119). And he need to post serious academic paper that prove (not hypotesis) how Avars were Turkic.

Ok, what? We're basically discussing the topic, posting sources, etc, then you declare yourself the victor in what is suddenly called "the grand debate" (lol) and then log off? I literally laughed.

He is a true beliver.

Just like I must believe in chemical trails, anti- vaccination, and Hungarian Jesus, correct?

The true believer here is you, who finds it abhorrent and impossible Hungarians can have any Turkic influence in their DNA and culture despite centuries of study and proof to the contrary.

Well, I still enjoy (enjoyed?) the talk, and look forward to your test results, my haplogroup brother.

**Nanushka** · 09-12-2017, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by Stears

The most common European genes, like the R1b and R1a are from central Asia, because the all of the ancestors of Europeans came from Africa, than they migrated to Asia, than they settled in Europe. Since all European peopulation came from Central Asia, it is just a geographic term. They had no relationship with modern Central Asian turkic people, who are relatively newcomers in that area, turkic people appeared in Central Asia long time after Europeans left the area.

LOL this statement bled my eyes; who were those 'europeans' that came from central asia for gods sake? Please explain and provide evidence. If it is that easy, then I am claiming that they were Turkic people from central asia-eurasia and you know what, unlike you I have enough evidence. Europeans today want their origin to be different than Turks while they want Scythians and Sarmatians to be their ancestors. However, they are successive people who came from the same origin. There is also sound evidence about sarmatians to be turkic as well as scythians, especially the leading clans within like Yazik and Sirak (The Sarmatians, İlhami Durmuş, Kaynak Publications, 2007 p.128) They were the ones who stayed in eurasia and didnt go to inner asia like some other turkish clan did (they are later called asian Huns and Tatars). I have previously written that southern siberia has been proved to be the actual home to turks and many scythian & sarmatian kurgans (ancient turkic word for grave) found in Ural – Altai region like pazırık, esik, ula etc show that they are all similar and belonged to the same origin and cults. Turks started their migration to various routes (west, east, south and even north) right from that very place.

And all those nomadic tribes that came to europe with great migration were or had something to do with Turks. What you write is a fairy tale of malicious, poisonous, old-fashined academicians that I call early 20th century jugglers. So who were there before turkic people like Hun and Avar arrival in Pannonian basin? I say Turks again; Sarmatians and Scythians (their times are intertwined between 800-300 BC) who had already been there before Attila and his people arrived. Moreover Karatay says ‘‘that Turks came from a certain direction doesn’t mean that there weren’t other Turks on the way. For instance Huns came from the inner Asia but they met with other turkic tribes in eastern Europe and Caucasia who went there earlier or who were already residents there right from the beginning’’ (Iran and Turan, Ötüken Publications, 2015, p.65)

So I am asking you who else would have been on the way except Turks (and Mongols later who invaded the area for some time)? ‘‘The Huns led by Irnek left cental europe and came to western Black Sea coasts where they found another Turkish tribe called Ogur and mixed with them. They lived across the steppes from Danube to Volga. Together they founded the Great Bulgaria. The word Bulgar comes from the turkic verb ‘bulgamak’ which means ‘to get mixed with’’ (Mualla Uydu Yuce, Turkish History Institution, 2007, p.68) This proves the statements above.

**Nanushka** · 09-12-2017, 09:35 PM

Originally Posted by Stears

All haplogroup markers show that Turkic people are a hybrid race of mongoloid (yellow) and white (caucasian) people. But the more important autosomal researches show that too.

Turks are not hybrid at all but they gave rise to new communities due to mixing with yellow race in the east and browns in the south e.g. Kazaks, Turkmens and Uzbeks in central asia and Iranian, Syrians, Lebanese or Jordanian in middle east. Turkic people like Avars or Khazar who arrived in Carpathia basin werent mongoloid, maybe some partially carried mongol genes but evidently not all of them (otherwise hungary today would be full of slant eyed people as mongolia). Turks are simply white race and that's why they get the dominant phenotype of the people of the region that they migrated to, namely first chinese and mongol then middle-easterns. You can see that their typology differs a lot from region to region if you open your eyes. Real (ancient) turkish phenotype is given by many sources; for instance Taşağıl gives the Chinese sources about the general typology of Kirghiz, one of the main Turkish tribes: ‘‘They were very tall and big, had fair skin, red hair and green eyes and thought that black haired ones were unlucky'' (Ahmet Taşağıl, Ancient Turks in Chinese Sources, 2016, p.94 & 103). He also gives the same typology for Khazar, Bulgar and Cuman-Kipchaks as well (p.94) Similar expression is given by Koestler too in his famous book 13. Tribe for Khazars. Cumans have always been defined as fair people with flaxen or white-blonde hair (Karatay, The Origin of the Turks, 2015 p.246-247-248) so have Oguz and Ogur-Bulgars, mainly from Persian and arab sources as well as armenian and other.

I can talk for avar and chechen people in northern Caucasia (who are thought to be descended from Avar and Khazar empires in history) since I know them very well; they usually have very fair skin complexion along with red hair dominance. They come second with that typology in the world after the Irish when the percentages are considered.

So dont stick to genetics so hard, after all they dont give proper outcome on their own without history and social anthropology, especially when Y-Hablogroup tests are in question. My sister's husband is R1b, an avar from his fathers side, in this case you will need to take him as brother too: )

I appreciate some honest oldies but to be scientific you’d better search for newer sources as well. All those outworn thoughts and thesis in europe are now being questioned and new ones are put forth, I suggest you follow them as well

**~~Stears~~** · 09-13-2017, 07:19 AM

Autosomal Researches.

There is no similarity between central asian Turkic and European (and especially Hungarian) populations. Central Asian turkic people are semi-mongoloid people.

**Loki** · 09-13-2017, 07:43 PM

That's enough, Stears. I don't want to see more posts of yours, harassing Turul and asking him personal stuff. I will delete any such posts, and if you continue it will lead to a temp ban. You have been warned.

**~~Stears~~** · 09-13-2017, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by Loki

That's enough, Stears. I don't want to see more posts of yours, harassing Turul and asking him personal stuff. I will delete any such posts, and if you continue it will lead to a temp ban. You have been warned.

The sharing of DNA information is Turulka's own personal decision. Nobody can force him.