Who is genetically closer: south Slavs and Early Slavs or modern Turkish people and Oghuz Turks

[Сербо Макеридов]

It is funny how turkified Anatolians (Turkish people) want to be Turkic (semi-mongoloid).

Turkified Anatolians have Stockholm syndrome, they glorify and identify themselves with semi-mongoloid Oghuz invaders, which were conquered their ancestors.

[Journalist]

I think the genetic difference doesn't matter, Slavdom is more about cultural concept, and it's most important that Serbs are very close to Russian Slavdom against dying and degenerative West.

[Сербо Макеридов]

I think the genetic difference doesn't matter, Slavdom is more about cultural concept, and it's most important that Serbs are very close to Russian Slavdom against dying and degenerative West.

[Сербо Макеридов]

Among Turkish people Turanids, Pamirids and other Turkic phenotypes are very rare.

[gültekin]

Haplogroup N in Turkey is 4% and Q is only 2%, in Turkey R1a is 7,5% but almost all is Slavic Z-280 and M-458 (inheritance of Janissaries), Z-93 almost does not exist, Oghuz may have brought some others haplogroups except Q and N but in small percentage.

Anyway in Turkey there is no more than 10% haplogroups which are inheritance of Oghuz Turks.

Your knowledge about genetics is from early 2000's I guess. Do you think Oghuz Turks were some kind of Arctic population? They were West Central Asians.

1. The data you have provided is from Cinnioglu's study (Excavating Y-chromosome haplotype strata in Anatolia), which was based on Turkish citizens regardless of their ethnic origins http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Cinnioglu2004.pdf

So it does not reflect Y-DNA haplogroups of ethnic Turks only. Besides, only an anthrotard would assume that Oghuz Turks brought only N, Q, C, O haplogroups, they also brought various subclades of R1b, J2 and other haplogroups. Even the Iron Age Altai sample had J2, let alone medieval Oghuz Turks from West Central Asia.

https://j2-m172.info/2015/06/j2a2-ph...uygur-turkish/
2a2-PH3085,SK1403: Ancient Altai, modern Uygur and Turkish

The huge Allentoft et al. 2015 research with low-coverage genomes from 101 ancient humans from across Eurasia included two males from Altai Iron Age (900 BC to 1000 AD) in the same J2a2 haplogroup (see Altai archaeology). Even more intriguing is that the ancient genomes share unique Y-SNPs with two modern samples: one Uygur and one Turkish



2. R1a in Turkey is not Slavic at all, it is from Indo-European and Central Asian migration, janissaries were not allowed to marry and they were mostly of Turkish stock after the abolition of the devshirme practive in 16th century.
Even if we ignore the fact that they were not allowed to marry, they were too few in number.

Year/Strength
1400 <1,000
1484 7,841
1523 7,164
1530 8,407


South Slavs are predominantly non-R1a, so cut the crap already. It was Turks who ruled your ass for centuries, not the other way around LOL


3. We have results from Anatolian Greeks, Armenians and Turks from same provinces and it is clear that modern Turks have significant Central Asian ancestry (not dominant but significant), the Turkic migration has changed the genetic structure of the peninsula.

For instance, comparison of Central Anatolian Greeks and Turks (Cappadocia)

The Turkic genetic input is not only limited to East Eurasian admixture as you can see, Oghuz Turks were Central Asians, not East Asians.


Table 2: 2 Turk from Niğde, 1 Greek from Niğde.

The Turkic migration seems to have made these changes in Niğde:
• East Eurasian increased
• Gedrosia increased
• North_European increased
• Atlantic_Med decreased
• Caucasus decreased
• Southwest_Asian decreased

Component/Population	Turk_Niğde(2)	Greek_Niğde(1)
Gedrosia	12.7	10.21
Siberian	5.06	0.36
Northwest_African	1.25	0.43
Southeast_Asian	0	0
Atlantic_Med	13.25	20.11
North_European	12.1	8.73
South_Asian	1.28	0
East_African	0	0
Southwest_Asian	11.55	13.59
East_Asian	5.04	0
Caucasus	37.6	46.58
Sub_Saharan	0.19	0

Is there any native population that can be used as a reference for pre-Slavic Balkans? If Vlachs (Romance-speakers) represent pre-Slavic Balkans then Balkan Slavs don't really have much Slavic admixture and are mostly of pre-Slavic stock. South Slavs can be modelled as 60-80% Greek 20-40% Polish (depending on South Slavic population) as far as I know but the thing is pre-Slavic Balkans (Dacia-Thracians) were not identical to modern Greeks genetically, they were probably more northern-shifted. Bulgarians for example seem to have minor Slavic admixture even when modelled with Greeks. So get your facts straight LOL

Albanians and Greeks are more Slavic than Turkish people are Turkic.

They are ~15% Yamnaya at most.


Turks have 10% East Eurasian admixture on average, so if Oghuz Turks were 30% East Eurasian modern Turks are 1/3 Central Asian, if the Oghuz were 40% East Eurasian then modern Turks are 1/4 Central Asian. We are definitely more Central Asian than they are Indo-European. I don't care how Slavic they are, they aren't Slavic-speakers and Slavs themselves are mostly of pre-IE stock.


As for South Slavs, pre-Slavic Dacian-Thracian autosomal DNA is needed, even if we model you with modern Greeks you are still mostly of pre-Slavic stock.

[gültekin]

Turks are 40-50% Central Asian (usually best fits are Turkmen and Uzbek) when modelled with modern Eastern Mediterranean populations, this is my oracle results.



Now, provide some sources/data about pre-Slavic Balkan genetics so that we can compare of Turkic and Slavic ancestry of modern Turks and South Slavs. But the thing is even if we use Greeks as a proxy for pre-Slavic Balkans modern South Slavs are still mostly of pre-Slavic stock and if we consider the fact that Dacian-Thracians were probably more northern shifted than Greeks then the Slavic input becomes even smaller.

The difference between Anatolian Greeks and modern Turks is big, so Central Asian input is bigger than most people think.

[Сербо Макеридов]

@ Gültekin

Tell me which haplogroup among Turkish people are Turkic origin according to you?

I do not think that Oghuz were East Siberians, I think that they were Q, N, R1a-Z93 and maybe some eastern branch of R1b.

Q and N i Turkey are obvious Turkic, but problem is because R1a-Z93 is very rare in Turkey, almost all Turkish R1a are Slavic branchs M-458 and Z-280 (inheritance of Janissaries).

R1b in Turkey is mostly native Anatolian, probably exist and Turkic R1b but in small percentage.

[gültekin]

It is funny how turkified Anatolians (Turkish people) want to be Turkic (semi-mongoloid).

Turkified Anatolians have Stockholm syndrome, they glorify and identify themselves with semi-mongoloid Oghuz invaders, which were conquered their ancestors.

"Turkified Anatolians" my ass

South Slavs aren't even predominantly R1a, they don't even have 20%, so what the fuck are you talking about? You are mostly of pre-Slavic Balkanite stock (Daco-Thracian). Most Europeans do not even score 30% Yamnaya/Indo-European steppe but they are so f.cking proud of their Indo-European "ancestors"

Here is an Anatolian Greek, they don't even come up as Turkish (aka "Turkified Anatolians" according to you)

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 43.19
2 European_Early_Farmers 17.39
3 Near_East 13.63
4 South_Central_Asian 11.23
5 European_Hunters_Gatherers 6.68
6 North_African 4.52
7 South_East_Asian 1.02
8 Ancestral_Altaic 0.79
9 South_Indian 0.72
10 East_Siberian 0.5
11 Paleo_Siberian 0.33

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Cretan ( ) 5.93
2 Greek_Smyrna ( ) 5.99
3 Cypriot ( ) 6.49
4 Azov_Greek ( ) 7.15
5 Syrian_Jew ( ) 8.03
6 Greek_Islands ( ) 8.05
7 Greek ( ) 8.41
8 Greek_Macedonia ( ) 8.43
9 Greek_Athens ( ) 9.11
10 Italian_South ( ) 9.46
11 Turk_Kayseri ( ) 9.78
12 Turk_Istanbul ( ) 9.81
13 Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) 10.19
14 Lebanese_Muslim ( ) 10.42
15 Greek_Phokaia ( ) 10.53
16 Turk ( ) 10.54
17 Romanian_Jew ( ) 10.56
18 Turk_Balikesir ( ) 11.14
19 Crimean_Tatar_Coast ( ) 11.3
20 Central_Greek ( ) 11.54

[Сербо Макеридов]

"Turkified Anatolians" my ass

South Slavs aren't even predominantly R1a, they don't even have 20%, so what the fuck are you talking about? You are mostly of pre-Slavic Balkanite stock (Daco-Thracian). Most Europeans do not even score 30% Yamnaya/Indo-European steppe but they are so f.cking proud of their Indo-European "ancestors"

Here is an Anatolian Greek, they don't even come up as Turkish (aka "Turkified Anatolians" according to you)

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 43.19
2 European_Early_Farmers 17.39
3 Near_East 13.63
4 South_Central_Asian 11.23
5 European_Hunters_Gatherers 6.68
6 North_African 4.52
7 South_East_Asian 1.02
8 Ancestral_Altaic 0.79
9 South_Indian 0.72
10 East_Siberian 0.5
11 Paleo_Siberian 0.33

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Cretan ( ) 5.93
2 Greek_Smyrna ( ) 5.99
3 Cypriot ( ) 6.49
4 Azov_Greek ( ) 7.15
5 Syrian_Jew ( ) 8.03
6 Greek_Islands ( ) 8.05
7 Greek ( ) 8.41
8 Greek_Macedonia ( ) 8.43
9 Greek_Athens ( ) 9.11
10 Italian_South ( ) 9.46
11 Turk_Kayseri ( ) 9.78
12 Turk_Istanbul ( ) 9.81
13 Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) 10.19
14 Lebanese_Muslim ( ) 10.42
15 Greek_Phokaia ( ) 10.53
16 Turk ( ) 10.54
17 Romanian_Jew ( ) 10.56
18 Turk_Balikesir ( ) 11.14
19 Crimean_Tatar_Coast ( ) 11.3
20 Central_Greek ( ) 11.54

You probably do not know but I2a-Din is also Slavic, Slavs were not only R1a-M458/Z280, they have few haplogroups.

[gültekin]

@ Gültekin

Tell me which haplogroup among Turkish people are Turkic origin according to you?

I do not think that Oghuz were East Siberians, I think that they were Q, N, R1a-Z93 and maybe some eastern branch of R1b.

Q and N i Turkey are obvious Turkic, but problem is because R1a-Z93 is very rare in Turkey, almost all Turkish R1a are Slavic branchs M-458 and Z-280 (inheritance of Janissaries).

R1b in Turkey is mostly native Anatolian, probably exist and Turkic R1b but in small percentage.

Read my post instead of repeating the same shit like a parrot.

R1a in Turkey has nothing to do with Slavs, it is from Indo-Europeans and Central Asia, Slavs did not even migrate to Turkey and Janissaries were not allowed to marry, they were mostly of Turkish stock after the abolition of the devshirme practice (16th century), so cut the crap alredy. I'm really tired of morons. South Slavs themselves are overwhelmingly non-R1a, so please post something that makes sense.

You can see the comparison of Anatolian Greek and Turk from the same province and they are from being identical, they are not even similar. Now provide some sources about pre-Slavic Balkans, I'm sure as hell pre-Slavic Balkanites also had shitload of R1a, I and other so-called Slavic haplogroups as they were also Indo-European speakers.