Turkic speaking countries might create free trade zone

[MertKaan]

MertKaan was the one who first accused Kazakhs of being turkified mongols, and said the original Turks were caucasian and all mongoloid Turks were Turkified.
.

ORGİNAL FİRST TURKS WERE NOT MONGOLİD . Laipanov K., I.Miziev I. - Origin of the Türkic peoples - TurkicWorld

 

[atatwolf]

I wrote a poem:

====================

When the time comes and the almighty tengri from the Altai moutains permits our rise. Our rage will unleash like tsunami. The command of attack will be given. Sky, sea, stars will align. The wolves in the moutains will howl in the whole of the Turkic world. They will say "we are with you, we are also one of you, we are with you". The Turkic forces will unleash like a tsunami on their enemies. A new dawn will emerge from the darkest hour of the night with moon and cresent in the sky.

=====================

 

[Charon]

ORGİNAL FİRST TURKS WERE NOT MONGOLİD

As long as we don't have any Autosomal DNA of Proto-Turks or Gokturks which shows from which race the first Turks really were we can only speculate about it whether the first Turks were Mongoloid or Caucasoid. Scythians were mostly Iranic steppe nomads who spoke an Eastern Iranic language. After the Turkic tribes had migrated to Turan they mixed with the Scythians and assimilated them linguistically. My theory is that the Proto-Turks were created by the contact between Mongoloids and Caucasoids. I don't like the racist agenda by many Turks and Azerbaijanis who characterize Mongoloid Turkic peoples like Kazakhs or Kyrgyz as actually turkified Mongolians.

 

[Wholegrain]

ORGİNAL FİRST TURKS WERE NOT MONGOLİD . Laipanov K., I.Miziev I. - Origin of the Türkic peoples - TurkicWorld

In central asia, all of the purest caucasians with the most caucasian phenotype and genetics are Iranic, like the Pamiris and Yaghnobi (Sogdian descendants). Alot of them look exactly like Europeans. While the Turkic peoples, in order from most Mongoloid admixed to least mongoloid admixed, Kazakhs, Kirghiz, Uzbeks, and Turkmens all have mongoloid admixture. How come these Mongols mysteriously missed all of the Iranic peoples and only mixed with Turkic peoples?

 

[MertKaan]

As long as we don't have any Autosomal DNA of Proto-Turks or Gokturks which shows from which race the first Turks really were we can only speculate about it whether the first Turks were Mongoloid or Caucasoid. Scythians were mostly Iranic steppe nomads who spoke an Eastern Iranic language. After the Turkic tribes had migrated to Turan they mixed with the Scythians and assimilated them linguistically. My theory is that the Proto-Turks were created by the contact between Mongoloids and Caucasoids. I don't like the racist agenda by many Turks and Azerbaijanis who characterize Mongoloid Turkic peoples like Kazakhs or Kyrgyz as actually turkified Mongolians.

Can you declare a language that does not have any grammatical, phonetical, or morphological connection with any and all members of the Indo-European family to be an Indo-European language? Can you declare a language that has only a sprinкle of the occupier or Lingua Franca language to be that language? One can, if he operates in the Stalinist Russia and is doing a Stalinist science. But what you would do when the dictator is gone, a sembalance of fresh air blows around you, but you spent 40 years proving the unprovable? Would you rescind your 40 years worth of muddying around, if you are an honest man, and admit that you were forced into slave performance? Or like Vasiliy Ivanovich Abaev (who in reality is no Vasiliy, no Ivanovich, and even not Abaev, but that is a separate story) continue pushing pseudo-science and insist on life-long fabrication? Abaev did just that, fooling uncountable masses and not a few scholars. A whole Scytho-Iranian theory is supported by the work the most debilitating excerpts of which are laid out below for public view.

Another dimention is the fact which all Ossetiono-Scythologists glide through. Imagine the headlines:

- Brits moved to Australia, and adopted the name "Aborigines", and started to call the aborigines "Brits", and started to call each other "Aborigine", and started to be called by the name "Aborigine" by their former aborigine neighbors. Wow!! And the aborigine neighbors started to call themselves and each other "Brit".
- Dutch moved to America, and adopted the name "Indians", and started to call the Indians "Dutch", and started to call each other "Indians", and started to be called by the name "Indian" by their former Indian neighbors. Wow!! And the Indian neighbors started to call themselves and each other "Dutch".
- Germans moved to Africa, and adopted the name "Zulu", and started to call the Зулу "Germans", and started to call each other "Zulu", and started to be called by the name "Zulu" by their former Zulu neighbors. Wow!! And the Zulu neighbors started to call themselves and each other "Germans".
-Balkarians and Karachais moved to Caucasus, and adopted the name "Alans and Ases", and started to call the Alans and Ases "Ossetians", and started to call themselves and each other "Alans and Ases", and started to be called by the name "Alans and Ases" by their neighbors. Wow!! And Alans and Ases started to call each other "Ossetian".

OK, these are just fake headlines, but in Scytho-Iranian hypothesis the Balkar-Karachai scenario is real and a major link in the chain of arguments. Balkar-Karachais do call themselves Alans and Ases, all their neighbors, including Ossetes, call them Alans and Ases, and nobody calls Ossetes Alans and Ases, including the Ossetes themselves. Wow!! This unreal scenario is implicitly or explicitly accepted by all "mainstream" and august scholars. Anybody else is looking for a Brookline bridge to buy?
All boldface highlighting was added in this posting.

The Scythian-Iranian theory follows the logic: Ossetians speak the Northern branch of the Iranian language, Ossetians are Alans, Alans are Sarmatian tribe, Sarmatians are akin to Scythians, hence Scythians were Ossetian speaking, hence linguistically the Scythians belonged to the Iranian branch of the Indo-European family of languages. A brilliant logic that, in the words of V.I. Abaev, "ends the light-weighted and irresponsible speculations on Scythian material which do not have anything common with science" (page 148). It is well known what fate in the Stalin's times met the people that pursued irresponsible speculations which do not have anything common with science. There were no peer reviews and no opposition to the book. The theory was unanimously accepted and voted "yes" by every surviving Soviet scientist. The dissenters were not eligible to surviv
The citations below provide the excerpts from the Abaev's book showing:

- that Abaev clearly understood the cardinal differences between the Flexitive Indo-European and Agglutinative types of languages.
- that unlike the Flexitive Indo-European or Afro-Asiatic language families, the Ossetian is an Agglutinative language and belongs to an Agglutinating language family.
- that there are insurmountable differences between the Ossetic and Indo-European type of languages in any category of the linguistic property analyzed: phonetics, morphology, lexicon, semantics, or syntax, .
- that Ossetian is no closer to the Indo-European or Iranian than any other language with a layer of the 20% admixture of the Indo-European vocabulary.
- that unlike the literate Alans and Bulgars who left masses of written materials, Ossetians did not have a culture of writing until the 19th century (?) and, since Alans were literate, the Ossetes must be the only people in the world which, per Abaev, lost their literacy.

There are other factors honestly illuminated by V.I. Abaev with profound impacts on the Ossetian-Alanian-Scythian-Iranian theory:

Ironian-Digorian relationship: V.I.Abaev casually refers to the one which is handier to use at the time. This allows the use of essentially two (2) languages. The Ironian and Digorian lexically differ as much as 25% in their vocabulary (900 out of 4,000 roots). This is more than, say, English and Portuguese from the respective Germanic and Romanic branches of the Indo-European family. And, notes Abaev, these differences belong to the different Caucasian substrates of the Ossetian language, not to its Indo-European layer. (This observation of Abaev is corroborated by genetic analysis which shows unrelated origin of Digors and Irons)

The graph illustrates the lexical structure of the Ossetian language verbally described on page 103 of the book, but graphically profoundly missing from the Abaev's book.
For a linguist Abaev to sample, say, 10 or 20 % of the lexicon and count the percentage of lexicon belonging to the professed Iranian, and the other Arabic, Turkic, Kartvellian, Adyg, and Nakh words was a matter of 2-3 days, out of his 40 years-long philological life. That he avoided doing it by all means is screaming about his professional candor.

Amazingly, it is universally accepted in the Indo-European scientific world that the Ossetian language, with 80% non Indo-European lexicon, 100% non Indo-European grammar and 100% non Indo-European morphology, is unquestionably an Indo-European language.

And so the Scythians, and later their linguistic kins Sarmatians, and specifically one of the Sarmatian tribes, the Alans, spoke an Iranian language akin to the uniquely opposed to the all Indo-European languages Ossetian language, which itself consists of 80% of non Indo-European lexicon. A lovely deduction, isn't it? Go figure that mechanics.

 

[MertKaan]

In central asia, all of the purest caucasians with the most caucasian phenotype and genetics are Iranic, like the Pamiris and Yaghnobi (Sogdian descendants). Alot of them look exactly like Europeans. While the Turkic peoples, in order from most Mongoloid admixed to least mongoloid admixed, Kazakhs, Kirghiz, Uzbeks, and Turkmens all have mongoloid admixture. How come these Mongols mysteriously missed all of the Iranic peoples and only mixed with Turkic peoples?

I wrote many time to you that why some turkic people look like more mongolid . we TURKİC PEOPLES have higher caucasoid Y dna with lower caucasoid mt dna . If first turkic people were mongolid then why turkic people have higher caucasoid Y dna ? LOL so what turkic womens went to to iranic lands and assimilated them ?
all of them about culture and life style . we turkic people have nomadic ancestry like mongols so many times we lived and mixed them than iranic people.

 

[Wholegrain]

I wrote many time to you that why some turkic people look like more mongolid . we TURKİC PEOPLES have higher caucasoid Y dna with lower caucasoid mt dna . If first turkic people were mongolid then why turkic people have higher caucasoid Y dna ? LOL so what turkic womens went to to iranic lands and assimilated them ?
all of them about culture and life style . we turkic people have nomadic ancestry like mongols so many times we lived and mixed them than iranic people.

The Iranic people in the steppes were nomadic. And have you heard of An Lushan? His father was Sogdian (Iranic) and his mother was Turkic. He served under the Tang dynasty in China but led a massive rebellion, which was crushed by China with the help of Arab mercenaries.

 

[ManUNITEDglory]

I wrote many time to you that why some turkic people look like more mongolid . we TURKİC PEOPLES have higher caucasoid Y dna with lower caucasoid mt dna . If first turkic people were mongolid then why turkic people have higher caucasoid Y dna ? LOL so what turkic womens went to to iranic lands and assimilated them ?
all of them about culture and life style . we turkic people have nomadic ancestry like mongols so many times we lived and mixed them than iranic people.

But Kazakhs have more Caucasoid mtDNA 45% - 55% than Caucasoid 18 - 40%..
The Kyrgyz also have high Caucasoid mtDNA 27 - 45% and all of them look Mongoloid or mixed.

Higher Caucasoid Y-DNA does not mean more Caucasoid men mating, Turkic already have heavily mixed DNA long before any Turkic expansion I believe they had mostly R1a with some Caucasoid mtDNA but they looked mostly Mongoloid like a Altay.



" Craniological studies of samples from the Pazyryk burials revealed the presence of both Mongoloid and Caucasoid components in this population. [4] quoting G. F. Debets on the physical characteristics of the population in the Pazyryk kurgans, records a mixed population. The men would seem to be part Mongoloid and the women Europoid. [5] "

 

[ManUNITEDglory]

The Pazyryk culture proves to be Iranic and Turkic influences. Many suggests they were Iranic while other Turkic while most suggest they were unions of Iranic and Turkic.

The burial showed that men had characteristics of part Mongoloid males while women Europoid. It can only be Turkic unless you're telling me Iranic were half Mongoloid.

 

[MertKaan]

The Iranic people in the steppes were nomadic. And have you heard of An Lushan? His father was Sogdian (Iranic) and his mother was Turkic. He served under the Tang dynasty in China but led a massive rebellion, which was crushed by China with the help of Arab mercenaries.

Lol so what you support that iranic peoples were assimilated by turkic ladies omg I dont care about An lushan father iranian or not but wiki said The surnames Kang and An suggest that they were respectively from the Sogdian kingdoms of Kang (康國; cf. Kangju) Actually we know that kangju people were part of kıpchaks

 

[MertKaan]

But Kazakhs have more Caucasoid mtDNA 45% - 55% than Caucasoid 18 - 40%..
The Kyrgyz also have high Caucasoid mtDNA 27 - 45% and all of them look Mongoloid or mixed.

Higher Caucasoid Y-DNA does not mean more Caucasoid men mating, Turkic already have heavily mixed DNA long before any Turkic expansion I believe they had mostly R1a with some Caucasoid mtDNA but they looked mostly Mongoloid like a Altay.



" Craniological studies of samples from the Pazyryk burials revealed the presence of both Mongoloid and Caucasoid components in this population. [4] quoting G. F. Debets on the physical characteristics of the population in the Pazyryk kurgans, records a mixed population. The men would seem to be part Mongoloid and the women Europoid. [5] "

bro i have never said that kirghiz people were turkicised. Clearly we know that they were turkic people . But we dont sure about kazahks because they have 12 big tribe but only 3 tribes have turkic origin others have mongolic origin

 

[ManUNITEDglory]

bro i have never said that kirghiz people were turkicised. Clearly we know that they were turkic people . But we dont sure about kazahks because they have 12 big tribe but only 3 tribes have turkic origin others have mongolic origin

Well I agree Turkic are mixed but they were predominately Mongoloid not Caucasoid at all.

The Xiongnu was the first Turkic empire and the people for example look predominately Mongoloid with only some Caucasian admixture.

 

[Charon]

I wrote many time to you that why some turkic people look like more mongolid . we TURKİC PEOPLES have higher caucasoid Y dna with lower caucasoid mt dna . If first turkic people were mongolid then why turkic people have higher caucasoid Y dna ? LOL so what turkic womens went to to iranic lands and assimilated them ?
all of them about culture and life style . we turkic people have nomadic ancestry like mongols so many times we lived and mixed them than iranic people.

Turkic people also mixed with sedentary Iranic peoples like Sogdians or Indo-European Tocharians. Iranic steppe nomads like Scythians took a major part on the ethnogenesis of most Turkic peoples. If an Iranian men produces a child with a Mongolian women or conversely this child will look like a Uzbek, Turkmen or Ugyhur. The Haplogroup R1a of most Mongoloid looking Turkic peoples like the Kyrgyz or Altaians is a different subclade than the Haplogroup R1a of caucasoid Eastern Europeans. The Turkic peoples carry mainly the Z93 mutation while the Eastern Europeans carry mainly the M458 and Z280 mutations. You must pay attention to subclades. You can't only say that the Haplogroup R1a is only "caucasoid". I think that the Haplogroup R1a mutation Z93 is mainly Mongoloid because I can't explain it otherwise why the Kygryz or Altaians look so Mongoloid

 

[MertKaan]

Turkic people also mixed with sedentary Iranic peoples like Sogdians or Indo-European Tocharians. Iranic steppe nomads like Scythians took a major part on the ethnogenesis of most Turkic peoples. If an Iranian men produces a child with a Mongolian women or conversely this child will look like a Uzbek, Turkmen or Ugyhur. The Haplogroup R1a of most Mongoloid looking Turkic peoples like the Kyrgyz or Altaians is a different subclade than the Haplogroup R1a of caucasoid Eastern Europeans. The Turkic peoples carry mainly the Z93 mutation while the Eastern Europeans carry mainly the M458 and Z280 mutations. You must pay attention to subclades. You can't only say that the Haplogroup R1a is only "caucasoid". I think that the Haplogroup R1a mutation Z93 is mainly Mongoloid because I can't explain it otherwise why the Kygryz or Altaians look so Mongoloid

Lol have you ever read old kirghiz manas epic ? Manas epic said that kirghizs were blond with green/blue eyes. Also old chinese sources about kirghiz wrote that kirghizs have caucasoid looking. Also what about r1b ? Turkic people has more older R1A and R1B Y dna than eu people. I searched iranic people genetic they have high r1a y dna but they have very low r1b but also turkic people have higher r1b y dna

 

[ManUNITEDglory]

Lol have you ever read old kirghiz manas epic ? Manas epic said that kirghizs were blond with green/blue eyes. Also old chinese sources about kirghiz wrote that kirghizs have caucasoid looking. Also what about r1b ? Turkic people has more older R1A and R1B Y dna than eu people. I searched iranic people genetic they have high r1a y dna but they have very low r1b but also turkic people have higher r1b y dna

Kyrgyz were said to be unions of Iranic and Turkic. The skulls shows they had a Mongoloid/Caucasoid population of mostly males and a Caucasoid population of mostly females.