Are Kazakhs indeed Turkified Mongols?

[mutabor]

I hope you understand that your theory falls under the definition "in my opinion", "it's seems to me" and etc. and has no relation with real scince?

LOOOOL. It is not even my theory. There is serious Chinese scientific research which places formation of Turks somewhere in Western Mongolia where haplogroups Q and C merged.

[mutabor]

DNA results of Kazakhs indicate at mixed origin between Siberian and Manchurian-Mongolian components. These two components merged and proto-Kazakh tribes were formed.

[Yaglakar]

No, it is not. Less than 10%. It's common in the Kyrgyz, must be the founder effect. Then again, the ancient Kyrgyz were described as white in medieval Chinese sources, I guess that elite was later diluted by Mongoloids.

Ancient Mongoloid Yenisei Kirghiz assimilated Indo-European Tagar culture. The Mongoloids who brought the language to Minusinsk hallow were probably low in numbers, hence dominantly Europoid features in the process of mixing.

[mutabor]

He says things are not typical for Kazakhs

And what other Kazakhs say? That Kazakhs emerged from Scythians, Saka and Massagetae? LOL.

In this case you should listen what nonsense Kyrgyz people spread that all R1a people originated from them Kyrgyz Aryanz. LOOOOL.

[Chelubey]

DNA results of Kazakhs indicate at mixed origin between Siberian and Tungus-Manchurian components. These two components merged and proto-Kazakh tribes were formed.

Proto-kazakh==proto-turk?

[Leto]

Kazakh GEDmatch, obviously a lot of Indo-European/Indo-Iranian admixture

I've posted an Uzbek and an Afghan before. This is another non-European person with a lot of Steppe-related ancestry. He's like 1/3 Scythian

Y-DNA: N1c1
mtDNA: M9a3a

Eurogenes K13 Oracle results:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Siberian 34.97
2 East_Asian 21.62
3 West_Asian 12.86
4 Baltic 12.16
5 North_Atlantic 8.6
6 South_Asian 4.6
7 Amerindian 2.69
8 West_Med 1.33
9 Northeast_African 0.75
10 East_Med 0.21
11 Oceanian 0.16
12 Red_Sea 0.06

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Kazakh 2.75
2 Kirgiz 6.37
3 Hakas 12.94
4 Shors 13.16
5 Altaian 15.34
6 Hazara 16.5
7 Uygur 17.44
8 Uzbeki 17.61
9 Afghan_Turkmen 19.1
10 Mongolian 19.41
11 Aghan_Hazara 20.39
12 Tuvinian 24.69
13 Buryat 28.34
14 Nogay 30.53
15 Ket 33.19
16 Tatar 35.5
17 Mari 35.84
18 Selkup 36.28
19 Afghan_Tadjik 37.38
20 Chuvash 37.47


MDLP K16 Modern Oracle results:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Siberian 31.22
2 SouthEastAsian 23.42
3 Caucasian 10.95
4 NorthEastEuropean 8.64
5 Indian 7.12
6 Steppe 6.77
7 Neolithic 4.79
8 Amerindian 4.41
9 Arctic 2.03
10 NorthAfrican 0.66

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Kazakh (Tien_Shan) 4.38
2 Kazakh (CentralKazakhstan) 5.18
3 Kyrgyz (Murgab) 6.6
4 Kazakh (Kazakhstan) 6.75
5 Kyrgyz (Kyrgyzstan) 7.33
6 Kyrgyz (Alichur) 7.67
7 Karakalpak (Karakalpakstan) 8.24
8 Kyrgyz (Naryn) 8.51
9 Kyrgyz (Tong) 8.83
10 Hakas (Khakassia) 11.01
11 Altaian (Altai) 11.89
12 Uygur (Uzbekistan) 13.09
13 Hazara (Baluchistan) 13.16
14 Uygur (Xinjiang) 13.33
15 Shor (Kemerovo) 14.73
16 Mongolian (Mongolia) 15.36
17 Bashkir (Muradymovo) 16.45
18 Kalmyk (Kalmykia) 16.62
19 Bashkir (Ufa) 17.6
20 Turkmen (Shumanay) 17.66


Dodecad K12b Oracle results:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Asian 30.37
2 Siberian 25.56
3 North_European 16.34
4 Gedrosia 9.36
5 Caucasus 7.61
6 Atlantic_Med 3.91
7 Southeast_Asian 3.52
8 South_Asian 3.1
9 Southwest_Asian 0.22

1 54.9% Uygur (HGDP) + 45.1% Altai (Rasmussen) @ 6.03
2 67.4% Uygur (HGDP) + 32.6% Tuva (Rasmussen) @ 6.73


HarappaWorld Oracle results:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE-Asian 28.35
2 Siberian 24.54
3 NE-Euro 15.5
4 Baloch 9.95
5 Caucasian 7.58
6 Beringian 4.55
7 S-Indian 3.48
8 Mediterranean 3.46
9 American 1.39
10 SE-Asian 0.75
11 Papuan 0.33
12 SW-Asian 0.12

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 kazakh (harappa) 5.11
2 kyrgyz (xing) 8.29
3 kyrgyz (hodoglugil) 9.16
4 uyghur (hgdp) 13.32
5 hazara (hgdp) 13.95
6 uzbek (behar) 15.34
7 altaian (rasmussen) 15.99
8 mongolian (rasmussen) 19.48
9 tuvinian (rasmussen) 27.17
10 buryat (xing) 28.66
11 buryat (rasmussen) 30.34
12 oroqen (hgdp) 32.27
13 nogai (yunusbayev) 34.36
14 daur (hgdp) 35.35
15 hezhen (hgdp) 35.85
16 yukaghir (rasmussen) 36.03
17 tajik (yunusbayev) 36.16
18 turkmen (yunusbayev) 36.31
19 nepalese-b (xing) 36.41
20 mongola (hgdp) 36.46

[Chelubey]

And what other Kazakhs say? That Kazakhs emerged from Scythians, Saka and Massagetae? LOL.

In this case you should listen what nonsense Kyrgyz people spread that all R1a people originated from them Kyrgyz Ayranz. LOOOOL.

The Kyrgyz cubclades of ra1 are identical to the Hunnic paleo R1a subclades from the same region.

[Leto]

Ancient Mongoloid Yenisei Kirghiz assimilated Indo-European Tagar culture. The Mongoloids who brought the language to Minusinsk hallow were probably low in numbers, hence dominantly Europoid features in the process of mixing.

Are the modern Kyrgyz closely related to the Yenisei ones? How much Mongolian blood do they have?

[Ryuk]

@Mutabor

You have to understand that,to defend the proximity of one language family to another language family, you must look at the structure of the proto language of that language family.
If you compare it to random language, you'il make a mistake.

For example,Sanskrit contains a large amount of retroflex sounds.This feature is shared with Dravidian language family and burusashki.According to your logic,because Sanskrit is similar to Dravidian languages,the PIE must be related to the Dravidian language family.
But it has nothing to do.Retroflex sounds have passed through Sanskrit from native Indian languages and the PIE language neither contains retroflex nor is close to Dravidian languages.

Also, the sound of Siberian languages you share does not resemble any Turkic language.

. Proto Bulgaro turkic language did not contain laryngeal,uvular or harsh sounds,instead it contains dental, palatal,velar and labial consonants.

there are significant differences between Turkic languages and paleo Siberian languages.

1-)Turkic languages have rich vovels,but there is not much in PS languages.

2-)Turkic languages have not as consonants as PS languages.

3-)while Turkish languages are nominativ languages,PS languages are more ergative.

4-)Turkic languages are agglutinativ,PS languages are polysentetic


Turkic consonants: labial(p,b,m) dental(t,d,s,n,l,r),palatal(č,S,s,ñ,N,R,L),velar(k ,g,q,G)

Turkic vovels:a,aa,e,ee,i,ii,ï,ïï,o,oo,ö,öö,u,uu,ü,üü,é,é é,perhaps ä,ää

[mutabor]

Proto-kazakh==proto-turk?

Haplogroups Q, C and N participated in original formation of proto-Turks. It is difficult to distinguish these three groups since they all three speak languages with similar agglutinative grammatical structure ( including Uralic and many Native American languages). R1a in Altai region was assimilated in my opinion.