Turkic speaking countries might create free trade zone

[MertKaan]

I know that the Yenissei Khirgiz were described with mainly Caucasoid feautures but at the same time the Chinese historians described the Göktürks as people with a small stature. The description of the Kyrgyz as tall, blue-eyes blonds confused many historians who assumed that they could not have originally been Turkic but rather Indo-European or Paleo-Siberian who took a Turkic language through the strong influence of Göktürks. The ancient Kyrgyz had also adopted the old Turkic alphabet so it could be the case that they also adopted a Turkic language after a while. By the way that's not my opinion but the claim of many Turkologists. Oh and the Huns were also mainly described with Mongoloid feautres by Roman historains:

"They made their foes flee in horror because their swarthy aspect was fearful, and they had, if I may call it so, a sort of shapeless lump, not a head, with pin-holes rather than eyes.

Jordanes also recounted how Priscus had described Attila the Hun, the Emperor of the Huns from 434-453, as: "Short of stature, with a broad chest and a large head; his eyes were small, his beard thin and sprinkled with grey; and he had a flat nose and tanned skin, showing evidence of his origin."[31]

really I bored any more . I wrote many times same things as you. But you dont want understand me . Your opinions has full of eurocentric view. Kirghiz people origin belong to kıpcaks like bashkırs ,karacay balkar, cumans and khazaks. if we follow eurocentric view then we will see there is no turks anywhere.

You think turks must be mongolid becuse turkic language family belong to altaic language family . lol Schoolbooks are the best weapons . Everyone know that. They from person's views, and since this ''ATLAİC'' theory is..
Universally Accepted'', it is still not an ultimate truth. Actually people who accept this theory dont even care to study it.
They simple believe it, without questioning it . And as far as I know every theory is ought to be questioned... Otherwise it becomes a dogma, an axiom without proof. Thus making this theory UNSİCEİNTİFİC and DUBİOUS. Main supporters of ''ALTAİC'' theory are eu centrist and some bunch of poor pissed racists . This is enough to understand why this theory was invented .Since it is nothing but a sheer racist theory. Thanks to it a rich history of relationships of Turkic peoples with Finns, I-E and Asians is being overlooked. Tragic consequences of this theory is that Turkic peoples are seen as ''İnvaders'' without any solid undeniable proof. In conclusion I will only say that '' ALTAİC theory is a big lie . A biased unscientific racist theory of XIX c.

 

[atatwolf]

MertKaan, onu birak da Rus kizi nasil tavlanir onu anlat bana. Istanbul gitcem. Neden hoslanirlar? basdan bi zahmet anlat

 

[Charon]

really I bored any more . I wrote many times same things as you. But you dont want understand me . Your opinions has full of eurocentric view. Kirghiz people origin belong to kıpcaks like bashkırs ,karacay balkar, cumans and khazaks. if we follow eurocentric view then we will see there is no turks anywhere.

You think turks must be mongolid becuse turkic language family belong to altaic language family . lol
Universally Accepted'', it is still not an ultimate truth. Actually people who accept this theory dont even care to study it.
They simple believe it, without questioning it . And as far as I know every theory is ought to be questioned... Otherwise it becomes a dogma, an axiom without proof. Thus making this theory UNSİCEİNTİFİC and DUBİOUS. Main supporters of ''ALTAİC'' theory are eu centrist and some bunch of poor pissed racists . This is enough to understand why this theory was invented .Since it is nothing but a sheer racist theory. Thanks to it a rich history of relationships of Turkic peoples with Finns, I-E and Asians is being overlooked. Tragic consequences of this theory is that Turkic peoples are seen as ''İnvaders'' without any solid undeniable proof. In conclusion I will only say that '' ALTAİC theory is a big lie . A biased unscientific racist theory of XIX c.

Why are my opinions Eurocentric? I could also say the same about you that your sight about Turkics is extremely racist Turkocentric. You are the only one who wishes that the first Turkics were Caucasoid. I already said that I believe that the Proto-Turks were probably Eurasian from the beginning. Sorry but it's not my fault that Gökturks or Huns were described with Mongoloid features by historians. The majority of lingusits SAY that it's not proven that the Turkic, Mongolic or Tungusic languages are genetically related to each other. The Altaic language family is only a theory and it's not proven like the Indo-European or Uralic languages. Look at the Wikipedia page about the Altaic languages.

 

[MertKaan]

@atatwolf Hacım özellikle bir şey yapmana gerek yok cool ol düzgün giyin tavırlarına dikkat et ve onlara sex objesiymiş gibi davranma - ha bu dediklerim içkisizken içkiliyken sagları solları belli olmaz senin kucagına oturur 10 dakka sonra başkasının kine
AMA PARA HER KAPIYI AÇAR

 

[atatwolf]

@atatwolf Hacım özellikle bir şey yapmana gerek yok cool ol düzgün giyin tavırlarına dikkat et ve onlara sex objesiymiş gibi davranma - ha bu dediklerim içkisizken içkiliyken sagları solları belli olmaz senin kucagına oturur 10 dakka sonra başkasının kine
AMA PARA HER KAPIYI AÇAR

Biliyorum da bazi zaman ne soylecemi sasiriyorum. Bu nasil oluyor ya.

 

[MertKaan]

Biliyorum da bazi zaman ne soylecemi sasiriyorum. Bu nasil oluyor ya.

Ot dan sudan uçan kuşdan herşeyden konuşacaksın ama siyaseti tavsiye etmem . Kendinden bahset onun kendinden bahsetmesini iste zaten kendisi bülbül gibi şakıyacaktır ingilizce biliyorsa, ama genellikle ingilizce bilmezler dış görünüm önemlidir direk yakısıklı olmak diye anlama tarz olman önemlidir. Birde annelerinin yanında bunlar masum kedi gibidirler Anneleri yanlarındayken fazla üsteleme

birde severler rusyayı övsünler moscow never sleeps falan filan gir oralardan

 

[Enemy]

Sometimes, it is really difficult to decide who should be who.

Can Turkish members tell me whether these people are Caucasoid or Mongoloid?

 

[MertKaan]

Sometimes, it is really difficult to decide who should be who.

Can Turkish members tell me whether these people are Caucasoid or Mongoloid?

if these people are mongolid then 90 % of turkish people must be mongolid . they look like more caucosid with mongolid genes

 

[Enemy]

if these people are mongolid then 90 % of turkish people must be mongolid . they look like more caucosid with mongolid genes

First one is Mike Shinoda, from Japanese father and European mother.

The second one is Alexa Chung (note the surname) from Chinese father and English mother.

The last one is Julian King, from Baptized Korean father and Canadian mother.

Now tell me which race they must belong. Difficult, no? I also felt this while studying race. I noticed that the Caucasoid mtDNA works magically if the person's mother is Caucasoid but father Mongoloid, it is always the Caucasoid mtDNA that finally wins as it becomes more prominent. Just like Black Y DNA which is always prominent.

 

[atatwolf]

Ot dan sudan uçan kuşdan herşeyden konuşacaksın ama siyaseti tavsiye etmem . Kendinden bahset onun kendinden bahsetmesini iste zaten kendisi bülbül gibi şakıyacaktır ingilizce biliyorsa, ama genellikle ingilizce bilmezler dış görünüm önemlidir direk yakısıklı olmak diye anlama tarz olman önemlidir. Birde annelerinin yanında bunlar masum kedi gibidirler Anneleri yanlarındayken fazla üsteleme

birde severler rusyayı övsünler moscow never sleeps falan filan gir oralardan

Inglizce bilmiyorsa, dansa davet edeceksin Genelde yabanci kizlar beni beyniyor burda ama sen soyledigin gibi kendinden bahset edeceksin. Ben daha cok soru soruyorum ayni interview gibi oluyor haha.

 

[MertKaan]

First one is Mike Shinoda, from Japanese father and European mother.

The second one is Alexa Chung (note the surname) from Chinese father and English mother.

The last one is Julian King, from Baptized Korean father and Canadian mother.

Now tell me which race they must belong. Difficult, no? I also felt this while studying race. I noticed that the Caucasoid mtDNA works magically if the person's mother is Caucasoid but father Mongoloid, it is always the Caucasoid mtDNA that finally wins as it becomes more prominent. Just like Black Y DNA which is always prominent.

if I meet these people on the street I guess I think that they are caucasoid. Because their caucasoid looking are dominant than their mongolid looking .

Inglizce bilmiyorsa, dansa davet edeceksin Genelde yabanci kizlar beni beyniyor burda ama sen soyledigin gibi kendinden bahset edeceksin. Ben daha cok soru soruyorum ayni interview gibi oluyor haha.

Haha yaws sen hollandada niye yapmıyorsun bu işleri canını yedigimin hollandası benim bile oradan kaç tane yamuklum vardı ama türklerinden hele oss dan

 

[Enemy]

if I meet these people on the street I guess I think that they are caucasoid. Because their caucasoid looking are dominant than their mongolid looking .

Haha yaws sen hollandada niye yapmıyorsun bu işleri canını yedigimin hollandası benim bile oradan kaç tane yamuklum vardı ama türklerinden hele oss dan

Caucasoid maternal ancestry is always more prominent than Mongoloid paternal ancestry. Don't know why but it is what I observed.

 

[ManUNITEDglory]

Even today Chinese think the Uyghurs are Caucasoid even though they are 52% Mongoloid on average in DNA.

 

[gr8vision]

OK I am sorry. I was not aware of Turkish sentiments. I just mentioned the term that is now internationally accepted. I didn't want to downplay Turkish creativity and accidentally fall in the crossfire between Turks and Iranians.

I am not representing Iranians or Turkish people. Please forgive me if I hurt you.

I just posted the photos because there was a discussion about race going on. A few days ago, I was doing research on the racial distribution in Asia and Eurasia.

I wanted to show that you can see how people looked like in those days. The Turkish painter highlighted the Mongoloid facial features in his paintings. I just wanted to show that.

I have no intention to insult Turks by mentioning the Persian style. Pardon me!

Not a problem - like I've written, it's obviously not the fault of yours or anyone else's on this forum, but the ridiculous position of Western historians who are deeply Turcophobic and pro-Iranian/pro-Persian, calling anything out of today's Iran as "Persian" despite that land being ruled by Turkic people for 1,000 years, and having a significant Turkic population, which many times produced those artifacts (miniatures, carpets, etc).

Also, let's not call people with Asiatic features (slanted eyes) as "Mongoloid". That 20th century racist terminology then creates an unreal expectation that everyone with slanted eyes are therefore "Mongols". Mongols, before Chingiz Khan, were not even that prominent, and not the dominant steppe people. And they ceased being dominant steppe people about 150 years after Chingiz Khan, too.

As I wrote before, most Turkic people indeed had and still have slanted eyes (Asiatic features). But not all, of course - that's a complex issue of ethnogenesis. Just like a "European" can have blue eyes and green eyes and brown eyes, or blond, black or brown or red hair, so can people from Eurasian steppes have slanted eyes and more rounded ("European") eyes - it's normal that both such eyes can exist within one supra-nation of Turks.

 

[Feyen]

Those are not Persian painting. They are all painted under Turkic rule by Azeri Turks. It clearly says Tabriz.

Those are Persian paintings, simply because they originated in Iran, were created by Persian artists and have their origins in Persian culture. It doesn't matter who rule the country. There is nothing Turkic about these paintings.

What does "Persian style" mean? It's a misnomer applied by Persian and Western historians (who are dominant, and thus of course it is not your mistake to repeat what they are saying).

You mean real scholars, in contrast to 16-year old Grey Wolf nationalistic Turks on the internet who try to claim almost every Iranian historical/cultural element, simply because their own culture doesn't reach further than yurt tents and nomadic barbarity.

How can it be "Persian" when:

1) it was painted by ethnic Azerbaijani Turks (or otherwise Oghuz Turks, since depending on the timeframe, there was no separation into "Azerbaijani Turks", "Anatolian Turks", etc), in a country

First of all, most artist, in which period in Iran whatsoever, were Persian. Iran, whether ruled by Arabs of Turks, have always remained its indigenous Iranian culture. These paintings weren't made by Turks.

2) ruled by Azerbaijani Turks (or Oghuz Turks, depending on the time), and

3) called not "Persia" or even "Iran" as is wrongly assumed, but by a Turkic name, such as Dowlat-e-Qajar, Dowlat-e-Afshar, Dowlat-e-Safavi, Aq Qoyunly (Ak Koyunly), Qara Qoyunly (Kara Koyunly), Atabakan-e-Adharbayjan (Great Atabek State of Azerbaijan), and Great Seljuq Empire.

Safavids originated in Persian Kurdistan, and weren't Turks, although there was a linguistic and militaristic Turkic influence in the empire. And you seem to forget that the Safavids didn't promote Turkic culture in Iran, but even resurrected Persian culture, which they proudly identified with. So the claim that these paintings must be Turkic only because the rulers were Turks is not only laughable, but also incorrect.

When you consider these very simple, common-sense and logical arguments, you will see that calling something Turkic as "Persian" is just not right.

There is nothing Turkic about these paintings. The same count for every other cultural element in the Safavid, Afsharid, Seljuq or Qajar empires.