yolas
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by yolas on Jan 31, 2007 13:04:33 GMT -5
well you were the one that said Armenians are whiter. Armenians in Turkey, Armenians I see everyday look like Turks. last time i checked my eyes see fine. And you said most Turks look dark. if you check the url above ( wowturkey ) you'll see it's not true. And I never said Turks look like Germans. Germans are nordid+alpinid types. But saying an average looking Turk look a lot darker than Greeks, Southern-Central Italians, the Portuguese would be like a joke in my opinion. I'm an ethnic Turk, and it's not made up. see, surprise for you: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrksMy ethnic background is Crimean Turk, Anatolian Turk ( both are Oghuz Turks ). there's some italian but it's not worth mentioning. too little.
|
|
|
Post by drooperdoo on Jan 31, 2007 13:16:19 GMT -5
Yolas, Your ancestors are from the Crimea? In one of my earlier posts I mentioned a time when the Ottoman Empire stretched as far north as the Ukraine. Here's Wikipedia's description of the Crimea: "Crimea is an autonomous republic of the Ukraine on the northern coast of the Black Sea occupying a peninsula of the same name." It's in geographical Europe. Hell, it shares a border with the Ukraine. So you look European because--geographically--your ancestors were from Europe. Let's not get into linguistics or religion. Just stick with the subject of phenotypes and geography: If you're geographically from Europe, you're statistically going to have a European phenotype. If, however, you're geographically from the Eastern Mediterranean, you're going to statistically look Eastern Mediterranean--as most people from Anatolia do. Like this Turkish girl who was killed in Germany: You mentioned Spaniards and other Southern Europeans. But she's several shades darker than even the darkest Southern Spaniard--with Levantine features that are largely absent in Southwestern Europeans. My only point is that Turks who look like her are more common than the fair Turks you presented as your examples--Turks who almost certainly arrived in Anatolia from northern regions within a relatively recent time-frame. Whether from the Danube [like Kemal Mustafa's ancestors] or from that peninsula to the south of the Ukraine called the Republic of Crimea. I know that--after the fall of the Ottoman Empire--there's been a desperate push to make all the former ethnic groups of the empire identify with "Turkish" as their collective ethnicity. But let's ignore the politics of it: Are you aware that the Crimea was named after the Cimmerians? They were one of the tribes of the larger Aryan invasion out of Central Asia into Europe. They were stereotypically fair-haired and blue-eyed, according to accounts from Antiquity. Of course, later waves came into the Crimea--Mongols, Iranians, Greeks and Turkic peoples. Judging by your looks, I'd guess that your ancestors were ethnic Cimmerians who were Turkified--that is, linguistically spoke a Turkic language, but who were ethnically aboriginal to the region. Kind of like Hungarians in Central Europe: an almost wholly European population conquered by a Turkic elite, and forced to speak an Altaic language, when genetically they cluster with the Dutch and Germans.
|
|
yolas
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by yolas on Jan 31, 2007 13:53:13 GMT -5
You're kinda being silly. Did i say Turks look Swedish I'm just saying you show the most extreme dark types and ignore average types like me and lighter people than me. you're kinda obsessed with showing Turks as dark. well, go on...
|
|
|
Post by drooperdoo on Jan 31, 2007 14:03:41 GMT -5
I'm not ignoring anything. I'm just saying that "Turks like you" may not be ethnically Turkish, in a wider historical analysis.
You said your ancestors were from the Crimea--which is in Europe and borders the Ukraine.
That's why you look more European than someone whose ancestry is strictly from the Eastern Mediterranean.
You're a newcomer to the region--so it's silly to pretend that you represent it. You're only in Turkey today because the Ottoman Empire stretched up to the Ukraine. When it receded, your ancestors followed that recession and ended up in Turkey.
So your phenotype is no more aboriginal to the region than the Dutch phenotype is to South Africa.
|
|
yolas
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by yolas on Jan 31, 2007 14:06:27 GMT -5
Dude c'mon... Turks have lived there ( and Turkic Tatars ) for centuries.. they may have mixed and become lighter. so what? tell me an ethnicity that's not mixed?
|
|
|
Post by drooperdoo on Jan 31, 2007 14:22:11 GMT -5
I'm no expert, and I could be wrong--but I'm imagining that Crimeans are part of the same wave of Turkic peoples that pushed on into Europe (in the case of Hungarians and Finns). They speak "Turkic" languages, too, you know.
And seeing as how genetic tests have proven that the language was imposed by an elite--and that the people aren't actually ethnically Turkic--I hypothesize that the same goes for Crimea, which is not too distant geographically.
In other words, I'm saying that--like a Hungarian--you're a Turkified white man.
A genetic test would probably establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that you cluster with neighboring Ukrainians.
But that's just my guess. If you want to identify with the Turkic elites that imposed their language on your ancestors, than that's up to you. I'm just explaining why you look more Ukrainian than Central Asian.
P.S.--I'm not taking political sides on this, but I know how Armenians are always blaming you for beating up on them. Well, this might amuse you but the claims go back to neolithic times. Armenians--according to their legends--originally lived in the Balkans. They were driven off their land and into Anatolia by your ancestors--the Cimmerians--as they left the Black Sea and pressed deeper into Europe. Go to Wikipedia and read up on the "Armenians" and you'll see mention of this. lol Will you never leave that poor people alone, Yolas???
|
|
yolas
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by yolas on Jan 31, 2007 14:36:17 GMT -5
well whatever man.. you are what you feel about Armenians, i've got two Armenian friends. Both are called Natalie. One is light brown haired and blue eyed, the other one is very dark ( looks like a dark egyptian, could be called " n word " in southern usa ). And i've seen other Armenians. Well they don't look Balkanian to me. However today's Balkanians are mostly descended from euroasian nomadic tribes as far as i know... Some people say original Europeans looked darker than today's europeans.
|
|
|
Post by annienormanna on Jan 31, 2007 14:59:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Jan 31, 2007 15:17:06 GMT -5
There is, without a doubt, a huge amount of phenotypic overlap between Armenians and Anatolian Turks.
No, he'd likely cluster with other Near Eastern groups. Crimean Turks are ethnically distinct from Slavic Eastern Europeans, and everyone knows that Anatolian Turks are indigenous Near Easterners. And then there's the fact that he actually looks Near Eastern, not Ukranian.
Word.
|
|
|
Post by imaginarypallies on Jan 31, 2007 15:19:49 GMT -5
There are no iranian jews in Argentina. And AgassiĀ“s father I dont think is one, in tennis message boards you always see persians (iranians) anf armenians fighting over whether Agassi is persian or armenian (pathetic, they dont seem to realize Agassi is half gringo), but Ive never seen him claimed as jew. I used to think Agassi was italian because agassi sounded kind of italian to me, later I discovered his father changed his surname to make it sound less ethnic, It seems that is common in the USA, changing your surname to make it sound less ethnic. the old man next to tonny bennet is agassiĀ“s father www.vegastennis.com/articles/2006/may/03/no_name/tb-MIKE_AGASSI_TIM_BLENKIRON_TONY_BENNETT.jpgwhen did I claim agassi as jewish? i was talking about that one should keep in mind not all -ian names are Armenian as alot of Persian Jews have -ian and iyan/iyen ending surnames. Ironically Armenian Jews don't usually!
|
|
|
Post by drooperdoo on Jan 31, 2007 15:43:28 GMT -5
Yankel, He looks "Near Eastern" to you??? You're a better man than I, because I don't see it. As to Crimean Turks not being Slavic--- I posited the hypothesis that the same Turkic wave that brought elites to Finns and Hungarians--elites who imposed their Turkic languages on them--was the same wave that earlier brought Turkic languages to the Cimmerian population around the Black Sea. If I'm right--and I'm not saying I am--then Yolas's ancestors would be "Turkic" in name only--like Hungarians and Finns. And by the way, I harked back further than Slavs for him. I said that his ancestors were probably ethnically Cimmerian--you know . . . the Cimmerians--from whom the region "The Crimea" was named. They're pre-Slavic. P.S.--According to Wikipedia, one of the components of Crimean Tatars is Khazar--which makes sense, since Southern Russia, the Ukraine and the Crimea are all within the same area. Look at these two Crimean Tatars: * As to me saying that Yolas would probably cluster with Ukrainians genetically, and saying that his ancestors are like the Hungarians--insofar as being "Turkic" in language only--check out this gene-map. Direct your attention to the lower left corner, where "Ukranian" and "Hungarian" are right next to each other. It's not definitive, by any means--but it does lend at least some circumstantial evidence to what I was saying: that the people in the region of the Ukraine [and that includes Crimea, which is politically part of the Ukraine today] are probably very similar to the Hungarians in the sense of being Europeans who were taken over by an elite of Turkic speakers.
|
|
|
Post by tyrannos on Jan 31, 2007 15:54:25 GMT -5
From what I understand however the Cimmerians were displaced or wiped out(either through intermingling or death) with the arrival of the Scynthians into that region.
Supposedly they were akin to the Thracians/Dacians.
|
|
|
Post by drooperdoo on Jan 31, 2007 15:59:41 GMT -5
Crimson, You impress me yet again. According to a genetic study I found on them, Crimeans do indeed cluster with Thracians, Dacians, etc.
As to Cimmerians---
According to Wikipedia, the earliest inhabitants of the Crimea were Cimmerians--driven there by their rivalry with the Scythians.
As to whether the Scythians followed them there, I don't know.
But I do know that the Cimmerians weren't exactly a sedentary people. No horseman culture is. That's why later accounts have them going into the Balkans and beating up on the groups there.
|
|
|
Post by tyrannos on Jan 31, 2007 16:20:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by imaginarypallies on Jan 31, 2007 16:37:36 GMT -5
Yankel, He looks "Near Eastern" to you??? You're a better man than I, because I don't see it. As to Crimean Turks not being Slavic--- I posited the hypothesis that the same Turkic wave that brought elites to Finns and Hungarians--elites who imposed their Turkic languages on them--was the same wave that earlier brought Turkic languages to the Cimmerian population around the Black Sea. If I'm right--and I'm not saying I am--then Yolas's ancestors would be "Turkic" in name only--like Hungarians and Finns. And by the way, I harked back further than Slavs for him. I said that his ancestors were probably ethnically Cimmerian--you know . . . the Cimmerians--from whom the region "The Crimea" was named. They're pre-Slavic. P.S.--According to Wikipedia, one of the components of Crimean Tatars is Khazar--which makes sense, since Southern Russia, the Ukraine and the Crimea are all within the same area. Look at these two Crimean Tatars: * As to me saying that Yolas would probably cluster with Ukrainians genetically, and saying that his ancestors are like the Hungarians--insofar as being "Turkic" in language only--check out this gene-map. Direct your attention to the lower left corner, where "Ukranian" and "Hunagarian" are right next to each other. well Droop did you know Crimean Karaites(the native Jews there) speak a turkic language Similar to Khazzar.
|
|