gazar

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian I'm talking about samples from the Karluks, Karakhanids, and medieval Uyghurs. We need more samples to know their exact genetic

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian I agree that the model may be incorrect in some places, but I also distrust the information that the Oghuz and Karluks did not have Bulan Koba, I can't believe their entire Eastern Iranian admixture is only related to the Sogdians. We need more samples

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian Uzbeks appear to be mostly descendants of local Sogdians

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian Logically, uzbeks cannot have many xiongnu, their main haplogroups are R1a and J2. C2 among some Uzbeks mainly comes from the Mongols (like the Barlas tribe from which Tamerlane comes)

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian The Uyghurs and the Xiongnu have little success with admixture here

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian I still think we need more samples to understand this. These data also varied among the gokturks, there were samples with high Bulan kobi and vice versa

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian So, don't the Karakhanid samples have a noticeable Bulan Kobi? It seems to me that we don't have enough samples at the moment to draw any definitive conclusions

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian @zjejsbsi31745 @Nogaycanavari So, in your opinion, r1a was one of the dominant ones among the Oghuz? Isnt it N?

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@TengriTini R1a is everywhere

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@JoanFrancescOl1 @eranudturan Racially, they are clearly more European-looking than Attila's Huns. Perhaps the term "Hun" didn't necessarily refer to an ethnic group?

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@TengriTini So the first Turk is Q and N?

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@TengriTini Simply put, who do you consider to be the proto-Turks?

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@Ilb3548 @Enzoenzo3434 what chatfpt? Leading ADNA researchers explicitly state that genes track populations, not languages. If you truly believe ADNA proves a 1-1 language mapping, cite the paper that claims it

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@Ilb3548 @Enzoenzo3434 Taiga ANA is an ancient ancestral component, not a linguistic marker. It was spread across Siberia long before Proto-Turkic formed. Imho Conflating population movement with language movement ignores basic historical linguistics and language shifts

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@Ilb3548 @Enzoenzo3434 Agreed on the Taiga vs Coastal ANA distinction—genetically that's spot on. But genetics isn't linguistics: genes don’t speak languages. Having Taiga ANA ancestry traces population movement, but it doesn't prove where Proto-Turkic actually originated as a language

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@Ilb3548 @Enzoenzo3434 Spot on on genetics: Altai HGs were Yeniseic/ANE, and Turkic ANA ancestry points to Transbaikal. But are Turkics really tied to the Amur at all? Linguistically there's zero unity with Amur languages just an areal Sprachbund, not common ancestry

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@oghurian I don't really believe in Amur; there's no genetic connection between the languages at all

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@ANAFratLeader @qazaqdna You have already received an answer about this above

[gazar @gazarLuk]

@Ilb3548 @Enzoenzo3434 In historical linguistics, the Proto-Transeurasian hypothesis remains unproven. Mainstream consensus views shared traits as areal convergence (Sprachbund), not common ancestry. Early Turkic and Mongolic groups formed in the Sayan-Altai and Baikal regions, not the Amur