Brand new genetic study on the origins of Huns, Avars and Hungarian Conquerors

[Nanushka]

Keep dreaming, Mongolian.

Mongolian is better than being dumbass and illiterate like you and you think you are aryan in your dreams? Ural is Turkic and it is in academia already, some people are not just gossiping and masturbating over facts like you do here

Actually she is half arabic (middle eastern).

says the attention freak of TA who has many socks ahaha this is all you can do, spreading lies about people according to your gut feelings wikipedia troll. I have shared my DNA results and none of them had none ME in the least and I have even many red hair in my family but I am sure you have a lot of gypsy in yours its apparent from the blonde avatar pictures you keep sharing so desperately lolol. All you write is always shit and have no academic base and others are applausing this autism since you are anti-Turk and entertaining them monkeying around

[Blondie]

Mongolian is better than being dumbass and illiterate like you and you think you are aryan in your dreams? Ural is Turkic and it is in academia already, some people are not just gossiping and masturbating over facts like you do here



says the attention freak of TA who has many socks ahaha this is all you can do, spreading lies about people according to your gut feelings wikipedia troll. I have shared my DNA results and none of them had none ME in the least and I have even many red hair in my family but I am sure you have a lot of gypsy in yours its apparent from the blonde avatar pictures you keep sharing so desperately lolol. All you write is always shit and have no academic base and others are applausing this autism since you are anti-Turk and entertaining them monkeying around

Ural has never been turkic, and you have no any real argument just personal attacks. Why am i attention freak? I have never maked any thread about me, i have no any sock, i posted the original Harmata source from the academy to refute you.

[Nanushka]

Ural has never been turkic, and you have no any real argument just personal attacks. Why am i attention freak? I have never maked any thread about me, i have no any sock, i posted the original Harmata source from the academy to refute you.

You havent refuted anything and you never rely on academia. I have shared many scientific arguments, mostly with evidence, but you are not even interested like many other trolls here. If I made a personal attack on you its because of your own personal attack on me in the first place, like the one above, what the hell is it, a scientific argument lol it is bad-faith. Know your place and dont ever quote me again, I will not either

[Blondie]

You havent refuted anything and you never rely on academia. I have shared many scientific arguments, mostly with evidence, but you are not even interested like many other trolls here. If I made a personal attack on you its because of your nasty personal attack on me in the first place, like the one I quoted above, what the hell is it, a scientific argument lol it is bad-faith. Know your place and dont ever quote me again, I will not either

What is this know your place? You are on european forum although you are not even european, and you are on hungarian thread but you are not even hungarian... I dont care what are you doing, if you continue these personal attacks and lyings i will just report you to Loki and you will be banned thats all. Kivan and Itilvolga was right about you, they said everything about your sneakly behaviour. These guys like you is the reason why turks have mostly negative reputation.
You didn't post anything, firstly you said Ural has turkic name, i posted a native ugric name "urala", after that you quoted Harmata, i posted the original source not even from wikipedia what refuted you

[Turul Karom]

Q is an original altaic marker, but proto-turkics had other haplogroups like C, R1, or N1, but doesn't matter we are talking about N1 and R1 haplo among pre-magyars. In the case of magyars why we should consider the siberian N1 marker as non siberian turkic if we can consider it siberian ugric? Why? Or why we should consider the R1 haplo as turkic if proto-ugrics also had this haplo? Its like if you would find a cup of tea in your mom's kitchen and you would think she ordered it from Romania because there are tea in Romania too, no, it makes no sense. The most realistic version is this tea was made by your mom in the kitchen 10 minutes ago. Why should we prefer a foreing influence instead of local answer?

I feel like this is getting into the territory again of "what is a proto-ugric/proto-turkic?" The problem is that several hundred or a few thousand years, and these people were totally different already from one another. For example, the Conquering Hungarians were very different from the proto-Ugrics/Turkics just like modern Hungarians are genetically different from the conqueror-era graves. None of these people are going to be identical to their ancestors from 500, 1000, etc years ago. Especially on the steppes.

I understand your tea example, but I feel like this tea example would be better for explaining the philosophy of haplogroup and admixture diversity while still showing common origin in my mind:

There is a tin of tea A. Over time, tea A is used and supplemented in the same container with tea B. Then tea C is added once that blend of A and B gets smaller. Over time, tea A is replaced to the point where it is now a minority of the blend. However, every time you make the tea, you can always taste the subtle flavors of tea A. Would you not say that the tea is therefore a "tea A blend?" I would, and most people would imo. The only time that you can effectively call into question if that is true is if the old blend is removed entirely to the point where there is no more tea A in the tin.

I ask you again, how can you classify an ethnicity linguistically if you don't know their language? Just because some profs thinks the avars were most likely turkics it doesn't mean it's 100% sure or something, because we don't know their language.

Don't ask me. Ask the academics that all say it. You know that even a casual search will say Avars were Turkic.

No, most hungarians do care about the conquerors, but they don't make about it a turkic identity quoestion like you do.

More than you think. Also, I'm more interested on the commonality of the steppe legacy shared today and what we can do with it in the future. That is showing promise as well. Conqerors having Hunnic admix should be the highlight of the conversation. This has been asserted by academics in a few studies now, but it seems like people don't know quite how to frame a response to it. It is almost an eerie quiet..

Okay, Hungary is not full member of Turkic Council just an observer member, and Hungary will leave it for sure if Orbán goes, simple because modern hungarians have nothing to do with them.

Full vs. Observer status had nothing to do with my point. Nothing at all, and you know it. The point was that the Turkic Council members say we are Uralo-Altaic, and you asked for countries, so I gave them to you. If Hungary left, they would still say the same thing, because the member states said it even before the Turkic Council was a thing. Your tangent about future membership is irrelevant to your original question since the member states will still call us Uralo-Altaic, which is a much fairer assessment than Finno-Ugric.

And it's a very nice thing if turks like hungarians, but hungarians don't care about it in general, neither West Europe btw. Hungarians compare themselves to austrians (or other central euros), not only because the historical relations, but Austria is the idol of most hungarians economically, that we must reach their economic level, this rivalization is also existed in the Monarchy.

I am not interested in economic things on the meta sense. There are things more important than money to me. I take care of my fiances just fine. Rivalry with Austria is cringe in the 21st century. The only reason Austria is doing better is because it was on the "free" side of the Iron Curtain.

Doesn't matter your opinion in this question, Hungary will be gypsie majority just like other neighbor countries if the government won't do anything.

You seem to think that I am somehow spooked by these numbers. What matters if the Hungarians will do something about it. Are you going to do something about it to help us, or are you going to just be sad that Roma are having kids and Hungarians aren't? If kids matter to people, then they have them, if not, they won't. Outside of ignorant mistake pregnancies or some form of rape, children are born when two people want them. A nation that wants no kids wants no place in the future. Thankfully, there will always be Hungarians interested in having a family, and not for stupid demographic reasons but because a family makes them whole. If you cannot see this, then maybe you either need time to think about things outside of the material, or maybe you don't want a kid. I don't know. It's all your choice.

Wrong, the elite vs commoners identity existed before the feudal hungarian state. The hungarian nobility always claimed that they are descedants of counquerors, but commoners (hungarus) are not, so they don't belong to the hungarian nation. It was the thinking in medieval Hungary and later until the national awakening. And nobody talked about any racial thing.

You are missing the point. I asked you, during the Vata Tengrist Pagan uprising, the "commoners" could have any king. Yet, they restored the founding dynasty to the throne. Why? Because they wanted a Hungarian ruler, not a foreign one. It is your words that make it sound more of a racial difference thing (commoners being different and therefore tension between them and conquerors).

Man... i deleted only 2 post, and now you present me like i always do it, bullshit. I have already said why i deleted it, i realized this is obsoleted, thats all. It's not my problem if you don't understand it.

Never said that you "always" do it. It was about this thread. Don't feel so attacked by it. It isn't like it matters in the long-term on TA. The only reason I type a conversation so many pages back is to do just that: have a conversation. I don't think that too many people will even make it this far in the thread.

Yes i know in TA the genetic test is like Bible, but i said million times why i don't do genetic test. First of all i don't trust in these companies who store you personal datas, secondly the language, culture and identity does matter not this cheap genetic test what is basically just playing with numbers, i have seen such genetic map which claimed such nonsense things like hungarians are closer to swedes than finns, or you will get different results almost in every test, sorry i can't take it seriously.

Then why trust genetic tests at all? Why not get your genome fully sequenced and keep that DNA data? That is the most scientific data you can get. I agree that some companies aren't as good as others regarding their quality, but there is no way that on one hand you use genetic data in your arguments then say that you don't take it seriously at all. Or else why are you even here?

Attila's haplo is irrelevant, it can be bantu-negro too does not matter, because he was hun and he will always be hun regardless of his paternal origin. And of course the hungarian academy is ugric oriented because the hungarian language is ugric, that's why. Its not a difficult thing, but i have never seen any hungarian prof who denied the significant old turkic influence. Neither me, nor Dunai don't deny that.

You are so close to understanding the perspective I am attempting to share about the Conquering Hungarians with that sentence. R1, N, etc, should not even matter that much in the end, but it does when people say nonsensical claims like Dunai stating because there is so much N that therefore Hungarians have a close connection with Mansi origins while R1 is dominant. The Conquerors are not Mansi, or Oghuz, or Kabar, etc. They are a unique blend that makes the Hungarians.

Dunai certainly did make such anti-Turkic claims, and many other anti-Turan TA posters have in the past on the forum. They will always say, "Hungarians had nothing to do with Turks" but now those voices have gotten much more quiet, and for good reason.

No, székelys are not turkic peoples, they are hungarians, but an unique hungarian subgroup with most likely old turkic origin. Btw if you really interested the origin of székelys you should buy the rubicon "A székelység története" historical magazin, 20 page only about it, they analysed every theory. Very interesting.

It is a very interesting topic. I have multiple books about the subject from the 1990s to today and watch the evolution of the theories. I have a small collection on my bookshelf of my favorites. Some say we have a Turkic origin, some say we have a resettled Hungarian origin. I have stated my opinion here about my own thoughts.

I want you to clarify this:

No, székelys are not turkic peoples, they are hungarians, but an unique hungarian subgroup with most likely old turkic origin.

So are you saying that you think the origins are different from the Hungarians via the European Hunnic origin, and that makes the subgroup Turkic? Also, it seems contradictory that if you say a group is "most likely old Turkic origin" but then say that they "are not a Turkic peoples." You will need to clarify this.

In my opinion, székelys are descedants of huns, and they lived in Transylvania since the huns, and later they adopted the hungarian language somehow. Of course this is just my subjective opinion.

Does this mean that you don't think that the Huns of Europe spoke Hungarian if my subgroup picked up Hungarian at some point? Because if Szeklers are Huns, and are not a part of the conquest from Asia but adopted the Hungarian language, then there must have been a different language; I would assume you would think it is Turkic? One of my favorite books is from Róna-Tas regarding Hungarian history during the conquest up to the establishment of the kingdom in 1000. In this, he says that while the name "Székely" is unique, he cannot state that the name alone is enough to differentiate from the Hungarians as a whole, and that settling on the frontier is not a good enough example, either. He says that a different origin is possible, but he believes that current evidence is inconclusive, and linguistically there are no differences in Szekler-Hungarian speech.

Of course everything is your subjective opinion. It's what makes talking fun.

[Nanushka]

What is this know your place? You are on european forum although you are not even european, and you are on hungarian thread but you are not even hungarian... I dont care what are you doing, if you continue these personal attacks and lyings i will just report you to Loki and you will be banned thats all. Kivan and Itilvolga was right about you, they said everything about your sneakly behaviour. These guys like you is the reason why turks have mostly negative reputation.
You didn't post anything, firstly you said Ural has turkic name, i posted a native ugric name "urala", after that you quoted Harmata, i posted the original source not even from wikipedia what refuted you

lol troll lets inform Loki and see his decision ok? You are the nasty one who attacked on me without any evidence and what I wrote was just an innocent reply You surely love Turkish losers like Kivan and İtilvolga bc they lick the boots of 'europeans' like you (lol) and I would never do that. I am a Eurasian and I have every right to be here since my heritage is all around Europe! I very proud of my ancestors and who I am, and I only talk with latest scientific findings and evidence,whatever I write here is supported by academia but you dont want to hear, then its your prb. I am only interested in truth and you can keep monkeying around just keep away from my posts

[Blondie]

lol troll lets inform Loki and see his decision ok? You are the nasty one who attacked on me without any evidence and what I wrote was just an innocent reply You surely love Turkish losers like Kivan and İtilvolga bc they lick the boots of 'europeans' like you (lol) and I would never do that. I am a Eurasian and I have every right to be here since my heritage is all around Europe! I very proud of my ancestors and who I am, and I only talk with latest scientific findings and evidence,whatever I write here is supported by academia but you dont want to hear, then its your prb. I am only interested in truth and you can keep monkeying around just keep away from my posts

Kivan and Itilvolga were two decent member, and not even bootlickers, but i don't care this personal argument, let's talk about these "facts". Can you post any non turkic source which proves what you claims?

[Hektor12]

in Turkey where if you are talking about such historical facts like amermenian genocide you will be prisoned.

The prosecutor's office decided that there is no basis for prosecution regarding the three members of the İHD, who were detained for carrying banners mentioning the Armenian Genocide in the press release, which was not authorized on April 24. In its decision, the Prosecutor's Office drew attention to the fact that the word "genocide" should be evaluated within the scope of freedom of thought.

>http://www.agos.com.tr/tr/yazi/20712...emek-suc-degil
>Newspaper belongs to armenian minority.

The german subforum is also dead, only Morti, Teutone and me write comments there.

Representing future of Germany= a Serbo-Gypsy neonazi, a religious black hole and hopeless youth.

These guys like you is the reason why turks have mostly negative reputation.

This person is the most mysterious person in this forum and i still dont know why shes here, whats her purpose and where she wants to reach...

[bained]

Can someone post coordinates of K2-52 or closest distance? I cant seem to find t.

[Blondie]

I feel like this is getting into the territory again of "what is a proto-ugric/proto-turkic?" The problem is that several hundred or a few thousand years, and these people were totally different already from one another. For example, the Conquering Hungarians were very different from the proto-Ugrics/Turkics just like modern Hungarians are genetically different from the conqueror-era graves. None of these people are going to be identical to their ancestors from 500, 1000, etc years ago. Especially on the steppes.

I understand your tea example, but I feel like this tea example would be better for explaining the philosophy of haplogroup and admixture diversity while still showing common origin in my mind:

There is a tin of tea A. Over time, tea A is used and supplemented in the same container with tea B. Then tea C is added once that blend of A and B gets smaller. Over time, tea A is replaced to the point where it is now a minority of the blend. However, every time you make the tea, you can always taste the subtle flavors of tea A. Would you not say that the tea is therefore a "tea A blend?" I would, and most people would imo. The only time that you can effectively call into question if that is true is if the old blend is removed entirely to the point where there is no more tea A in the tin.

Too much blah blah, and you still didn't answer that if the hungarian language is ugric then why we should suppose a foreign genetic influence instead of local when these paternal origins have been found among the pre-ugrics too. It makes absolutely no sense. And yes the Academy is ugric oriented because the hungarian language is ugric.

Don't ask me. Ask the academics that all say it. You know that even a casual search will say Avars were Turkic.

I love your style when the Academy proves you that you love the Academy and if they don't (like in the case of pre magyars) you ignore them But nope, only the turkic academy claims that avars were turkic without any linguistic proof. But this is a source from the Academy what you like so much:

The language of Avars is practically unknown; but educated guesses tell that it may have been Old Turkish, or something between Turkish and Mongolian

http://www.rmki.kfki.hu/~lukacs/AVARS.htm

So avars cannot be classified, these are just speculations.

The point was that the Turkic Council members say we are Uralo-Altaic, and you asked for countries, so I gave them to you. If Hungary left, they would still say the same thing, because the member states said it even before the Turkic Council was a thing. Your tangent about future membership is irrelevant to your original question since the member states will still call us Uralo-Altaic, which is a much fairer assessment than Finno-Ugric.

I dont care what politicians says, and i dont care the opinion of dictatorships where the scientific life is not even free. Like it or not the hungarian language is finno-ugric, uralic and not altaic, neither partly.

I am not interested in economic things on the meta sense. There are things more important than money to me. I take care of my fiances just fine. Rivalry with Austria is cringe in the 21st century. The only reason Austria is doing better is because it was on the "free" side of the Iron Curtain.

I have talked about hungarians in general not about you, and hungarians compare themselves to austrians or other central euros, not to turkmens or kazakhs.

You are missing the point. I asked you, during the Vata Tengrist Pagan uprising, the "commoners" could have any king. Yet, they restored the founding dynasty to the throne. Why? Because they wanted a Hungarian ruler, not a foreign one.

What do you want with it? The commoners were not even foreigners, of course they wanted the Árpád dynasty.

Then why trust genetic tests at all? Why not get your genome fully sequenced and keep that DNA data? That is the most scientific data you can get. I agree that some companies aren't as good as others regarding their quality, but there is no way that on one hand you use genetic data in your arguments then say that you don't take it seriously at all. Or else why are you even here?

The case of pre magyars are totally different, and these analyses are far more thorough than these cheap tests from the street.

You are so close to understanding the perspective I am attempting to share about the Conquering Hungarians with that sentence. R1, N, etc, should not even matter that much in the end, but it does when people say nonsensical claims like Dunai stating because there is so much N that therefore Hungarians have a close connection with Mansi origins while R1 is dominant. The Conquerors are not Mansi, or Oghuz, or Kabar, etc. They are a unique blend that makes the Hungarians.

The genetic relations does matter if we want to prove that premagyars connected to the uralic peoples. Attila was just one person, he doesnt represent all hun. And according to these sources what Dunai also posted these tests confirms their uralic origin.

Dunai certainly did make such anti-Turkic claims, and many other anti-Turan TA posters have in the past on the forum. They will always say, "Hungarians had nothing to do with Turks" but now those voices have gotten much more quiet, and for good reason.

The real reason is others have no time to discuss with such fanatics like you especially many hours per day, because it makes no sense. You are a fanatic beliver, and doesnt matter what others or the hungarian Academy says, your opinion will never change, because you make identity question about it. This is the real reason. The academy and the scientific world consider hungarians as uralic, and you personal opinion doesnt matter.