tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post4874953875066529186..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: The Central Asian element in Turks (part 3)Dienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-37731540188434944462015-07-02T08:12:35.996+03:002015-07-02T08:12:35.996+03:00"Uzbeks, the best representative of the Centr..."Uzbeks, the best representative of the Central Asian ancestors of the Turks"<br /><br />Huh, really?! Well, among all Central Asians, Turkmens are closest to Turkish people in terms of language, culture and traditions. Turkmens and Turkish people have very similar cuisines, similar national costumes and ornaments, very similar traditional folk music, the same epics and legends such as Koroglu/Gorogly and Korkut/Gorkut Ata. Even the names of the tribes/clans are the same or very similar in Turkey and Turkmenistan.That's not surprising because the Seljuk Empire and the later Anatolian Beyliks were both Turkmen entities and those Turkic people who came to Anatolia were Turkmens. The ethnonym of Turkish people have been Turkmen (Turcoman in English). Ottoman documents refer to ethnic Turks as "Turkmen" too. They called themselves Turkmen; many people in Turkey still do. All the Turks in Iraq and Syria, who originally brought from Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia, still call themselves Turkmen as well.<br /><br />Turkmen language is from the Oghuz branch whereas Uzbek language is from the Qarluq/Chaghatai branch. Turkmen and Turkish are mutually intelligible while Uzbek and Turkish isn't. Uzbek culture, including the traditional costumes, music and epics, isn't as close to the Turkish ones as Turkmen culture are. <br />By the way, Uzbeks came to Central Asia centuries after Oghuzes and drove them out of what is now Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. (Kyrgyzes came to Central Asia in the 17th century from the Yenisei-Altay region and they drove the Uzbeks out of what is now Kyrgyzstan. Karma is a b..ch, ehhehe) Also, Uzbeks have high amount of Mongolic input (like Kazakhs do) thanks to the Turkicised Mongols in the Chaghatai and Timurid eras; this is evident in many of their clan/tribe names which are historically Mongolian. They have also assimilated and absorbed countless Tajik Persians so far.<br /><br />So, how can today's non-Oghuz Uzbeks (who are conglomeration of Karluks, Chigils, Tukhsis, Yaghmas, Kypchaks, Mongols, Kalmuks, Tajiks) be the best representative of the 11th-14th centuries' Oghuzes/Turkmens?Zaya Kolpahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14625223775919378117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-10333409323484734352015-05-02T08:26:59.031+03:002015-05-02T08:26:59.031+03:00Which datasets of Turks you used? Where those Turk...<i>Which datasets of Turks you used? Where those Turkish samples selected? Did you include North Eastern Turkish samples? like Turkish_Trabzon dataset as well? Where was those Turkish samples located? Central and western Anatolia?</i><br /><br />Dienekes used the Behar et al. Turkish samples and his Dodecad Project's Turkish samples for this analysis. The Behar et al. Turks are from Cappadocia. The Dodecad Turks are from the Anatolian and Balkan Turkish lands in general, but overhwelmingly from the Anatolian Turkish lands judging by their average results.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-35283266794277705282015-04-24T03:04:40.315+03:002015-04-24T03:04:40.315+03:00Good work. 1:6 is even so high for a mixing effect...Good work. 1:6 is even so high for a mixing effect of nomadic tribes with Anatolians. It means those nomadic tribes able to mixed with native anatolians in last 1000 thousand year and formed nowadays hybrid Turkish culture in Anatolia (although some idiots does not accept that facts). But I have some question about your study (which disturb me a bit for measuring a ethnicity to detect how much invader they were!!! If i am wrong i m sorry for judging you ) Which datasets of Turks you used? Where those Turkish samples selected? Did you include North Eastern Turkish samples? like Turkish_Trabzon dataset as well? Where was those Turkish samples located? Central and western Anatolia?<br /><br />And while you are tring to findout effect of nomadic migration on anatolia have you ever thought to find out whats the effect of greek colonists on pontic people to measure "how much greek" are Pontic Greeks? Actualy i dont think that you could find any population on the world to create a pontic greek admixture, by mixing a non pontic greek from greece with it. (May be you can get pontic greek admixture by mixing Cypriots and Lazs, but not Greeks from greece)Gökhanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00080085717667196486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-29395198210412285842015-03-24T16:52:36.110+02:002015-03-24T16:52:36.110+02:00What do you expect from the blog of a Greek?
Just...What do you expect from the blog of a Greek?<br /><br />Just look at the so-called research.<br /><br />20 samples trying to tell us that Turks are not real Turks Lol.<br /><br />Who did you take those samples from? Kurds, Armenians?<br /><br />All of this is a deliberate and systematic operation with a political agenda behind it.<br /><br />Science should be left at the hands of charlatans.<br /><br />-<br /><br />Assimilation and forced conversion was never a traditional and historical policy of Turks and you have no arguments to prove the opposite.<br /><br />* The languages and cultures of the nations that formed the Ottoman Empire were protected so well that in such a short time, a new Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Yugoslavia and Arab states were established with all of their uniqueness.<br />(Jean Paul Roux, French Turkologist)<br /><br />Turks were never Asiatic looking at first place. Eastern Huns that are considered as the ancestors of modern Turks, were a hybrid of Caucasian and Asiatic, but predominantly Caucasian.<br /><br />"Look in the mirror" is not argument either since as science proved, eastern and western Turks are not two distinct ancestry. Skull, blood group type, height, face scale measurements confirm the unity in the root, which means the same nation and you have no arguments to prove the opposite.<br /><br />* Under various names, the Turks lived long before our era in the Eastern, Western Europe, Asia Minor, Near East, Central Asia and Western Siberia.<br />(M. Zakiev)<br /><br />What you call Armen and Greek are artificial identities, invented by 19th century western historiography based on myths and legends. Turks and Persians are the only two historical nations with state tradition in Asia Minor and you have no arguments to prove the oppositeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-81389558982905167072013-05-30T17:30:00.478+03:002013-05-30T17:30:00.478+03:00RAGERAGE,
As I repeatedly told you, there is no ...RAGERAGE, <br /><br />As I repeatedly told you, there is no value in making a discussion on your fringe and incorrect views and statements. Please go waste your time somewhere else.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-39265228334086253622013-05-30T17:19:54.451+03:002013-05-30T17:19:54.451+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-21483815628538359122013-05-29T23:41:07.259+03:002013-05-29T23:41:07.259+03:00Most of the assumptions about Mongoloid origin of ...<i>Most of the assumptions about Mongoloid origin of Turks are based upon Altaic theory that an Altaic language was existed and consisted of Turks and Mongoloid populations. The theoretical Proto-Altaic language's vocabulary consisted of 92% proto-Turkish words! Just a question: Which language's vocabulary in the world consisted 92% proto-Turkish words? The answer: Of course just Turkish! We should talk about Proto-Turkish and its heavy influence over Mongoloid populations in the east from 3rd millenium BC.</i><br /><br />The Mongoloidness (dominantly if not fully) of the original Turkic peoples does not depend on whether the Altaic language family exists or not. Most of the support comes from harder disciplines such as genetics, archaeology (including craniometric studies), etc. and also from history.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-39311747950389976122013-05-29T18:52:56.892+03:002013-05-29T18:52:56.892+03:00Most of the assumptions about Mongoloid origin of ...Most of the assumptions about Mongoloid origin of Turks are based upon Altaic theory that an Altaic language was existed and consisted of Turks and Mongoloid populations. The theoretical Proto-Altaic language's vocabulary consisted of 92% proto-Turkish words! Just a question: Which language's vocabulary in the world consisted 92% proto-Turkish words? The answer: Of course just Turkish! We should talk about Proto-Turkish and its heavy influence over Mongoloid populations in the east from 3rd millenium BC. <br /><br />"It has been suggested that the Turkish, Mongolian and Tungus languages form such a family, commonly called the Altaic, and that they are all descended from a lost primaeval language called Altaic or Proto-Altaic. For some years now I have been coming more and more to the opinion that this is an error and that the fact that these languages gave a good deal of vocabulary material in common is best explained, not by assuming that they have inherited it from a common ancestor, but by assuming that a prolonged and complicated process of exchanges has taken place between these languages. … I am quite convinced that Turkish is not genetically related to either of them". (CLAUSON GERARD, 2000: Studies in Turkic and Mongolic linguistics).<br /><br />Bulan Goldsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08383112370502114428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-28916130777579221852013-05-29T17:43:10.068+03:002013-05-29T17:43:10.068+03:00Onur, "telling your urguements are wrong"...<i>Onur, "telling your urguements are wrong" is not an answer. Stop your idiotic deliriums, and give scientific resources about the arguements. Who cares what you think? I have answered your false claims and you can not answer back a single one them. Accusation of ethnocentrism is ridiculous while I do not mention a single Turkish source, this is your way to escape, that is it! Also not a single Turk should accused with ethnocentrism because almost everything about Turks have found by non-Turks, not Turks.</i><br /><br />I have written on these issues for years in various Internet blogs and have presented sufficient explanations and proofs for my arguments. You can find answers to all of your questions and claims in my writings. <br /><br />Your nationalist bias is very obvious from your writings. That is why I was 99.9% sure that you are a Turkish nationalist after reading your first posts. No non-Turkish nationalist would write what you write. <br /><br /><i>You falsely claimed that "Turkic tribes coming to Anatolia ...came from what is now Kazakhstan very quickly passing through what is now Turkmenistan and Iran"? And I wrote 300 years Oghuz Yabgu State and a millenium Turkish domination in Iran and asked do you think such a long political bodies could be called "quickly passing"</i><br /><br />The territories of the Oghuz Yabghu state were in what is now Kazakhstan, not in what is now Turkmenistan or Iran. The original Turkmens invaded Anatolia and the Armenian Highland concurrently (during the same centuries) with what is now Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, the Transcaucasus, Mesopotamia, Syria, etc. They invaded all those lands from what is now Kazakhstan, the territories of the Oghuz Yabghu state. <br /><br /><i>But there is no answer of course. If you deny that Hattians, Hurrians, Subarians, etc. were not indo-European or Semitic populations, then please show us your scientific sources.</i><br /><br />I have never claimed that Hattians and Hurrians were Indo-European or Semitic, it is rather the opposite; do not ascribe to me views that I have never held. Also I have never said anything about the identity of Subarians (they are a rather obscure peopole).<br /><br /><i>Everyone sees your bad intentions and on purpose writings, and your claim about that you know history, archaeology, geography, etc. is ridiculous. You are possibly an anti-Turk nationalist of a little nation, who try to twist facts by using a Turkish nick. You called Turksih conquest as Turkci-invasion! When in the history Turks called thenmselves as Turkic, and why do you call it as invasion? Did Akkadians, Hittites, Assyrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, etc. not invade but conquer the land in your opinion? I, myself for example always write The Fall/Cohquest of constantinople, because of course it had double sides. Both of them, defenders and attcakers' armies consisted Chirstians and Muslims. History according to ideology is just stupidity.<br /><br />At the end, I do not write to someone whose motives are so clear but for smart people, to show the truth by putting facts on the table.</i><br /><br />I am a Turk and I am not an anti-Turkish nationalist. I do not care about nationalism. I see nationalism as a passing whim of the world that climaxed during the 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries. <br /><br />I see no difference between invasion, conquest, fall, etc. I am not obsessed with words.<br /><br />There is nothing of value in your posts and I see corresponding with you as a waste of time.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-29043239078622548612013-05-29T10:34:33.476+03:002013-05-29T10:34:33.476+03:00Onur, "telling your urguements are wrong"...Onur, "telling your urguements are wrong" is not an answer. Stop your idiotic deliriums, and give scientific resources about the arguements. Who cares what you think? I have answered your false claims and you can not answer back a single one them. Accusation of ethnocentrism is ridiculous while I do not mention a single Turkish source, this is your way to escape, that is it! Also not a single Turk should accused with ethnocentrism because almost everything about Turks have found by non-Turks, not Turks. <br /><br />You falsely claimed that "Turkic tribes coming to Anatolia ...came from what is now Kazakhstan very quickly passing through what is now Turkmenistan and Iran"? And I wrote 300 years Oghuz Yabgu State and a millenium Turkish domination in Iran and asked do you think such a long political bodies could be called "quickly passing"<br /><br />But there is no answer of course. If you deny that Hattians, Hurrians, Subarians, etc. were not indo-European or Semitic populations, then please show us your scientific sources.<br /><br />Everyone sees your bad intentions and on purpose writings, and your claim about that you know history, archaeology, geography, etc. is ridiculous. You are possibly an anti-Turk nationalist of a little nation, who try to twist facts by using a Turkish nick. You called Turksih conquest as Turkci-invasion! When in the history Turks called thenmselves as Turkic, and why do you call it as invasion? Did Akkadians, Hittites, Assyrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, etc. not invade but conquer the land in your opinion? I, myself for example always write The Fall/Cohquest of constantinople, because of course it had double sides. Both of them, defenders and attcakers' armies consisted Chirstians and Muslims. History according to ideology is just stupidity.<br /><br />At the end, I do not write to someone whose motives are so clear but for smart people, to show the truth by putting facts on the table. Bulan Goldsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08383112370502114428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-70293683240323898482013-05-27T22:34:50.003+03:002013-05-27T22:34:50.003+03:00RAGERAGE,
You made claims that are so incorrect, ...RAGERAGE,<br /><br />You made claims that are so incorrect, baseless, ignorant and/or tendencious that they are not worth a reply (you seem to have a very poor knowledge of genetics, history, geography, demographics, physical anthropology and archaeology and also a reading problem). I am almost sure that you are a Turkish nationalist who dogmatically believes that most of the ancestry of Turks comes from the Turkic migrants coming to Anatolia rather than the pre-Turkic-invasion Anatolians. Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-41471893947505289772013-05-23T22:25:10.762+03:002013-05-23T22:25:10.762+03:00Onur has claimed that "invaders of Anatolia (...Onur has claimed that "invaders of Anatolia (the original Turkmens) were more Mongoloid and less Caucasoid than Uzbeks." He wrote "he thinks..." Ok, who cares what anyone thinks? Where is the accurate data? Please just google "tyurki.jpeg" petroglyph and see what Turks in Mongolia looked like 12-14 centuries before. Look carefully their almond shape eyes and long-narrow noses. According to which data somebody claims that Turks are Mongoloids. Is it too hard to compare central Asian Turkish kurgans' burials and Today's Turks' physical attributes or genetic relations at least by Russian researchs? If Anatolian Turks are all Turkicified Anatolian local people, why is that not a single source mention this process in the last millenium? How could Patriarchate records, Christan chronicles, etc. not contain a single complain about Turkicification of such a great settled Christian population by nomads and lost of Christian communities. There is just some records about individual conversion, even that shows such a conversion is rare and worthy to mention it.<br /><br />Other controversial claim is that Anatolia had over 12 million population when the Turks come. Where is the accurate data again? Anatolia had 12 million population in the 2-3 centurias AD. after t3rd century Roman imperial system collapsed, by that system, trade routes, trade, etc. population could rise to that number. Until 20th century Anatolia could not feed more than 10 million people with her own agricultural production. Anatolian people's survival depended on weather/rain, or they had to starve. Even Anatolia In the beginning of 18th century BC Anatolia had just 6 million population. After 3rd century Roman imperial system collapsed, trade failed, and also we should mention destructive wars between Sasanid Iran and Eastern Roman Empire over 130 years. Sasanid-Roman wars based on destruction of the land to prevent logistics of enemy. After Islam expansion Anatolia still was a continuous battlefield, population lived around the castles and fortified settlements and all the settlements were shrinked to their minimal size. Even the last active Abbasid Caliph Harun al-Rashid swept Anatolia. In summary how a land crushed in contunous wars more than 600 years, has a great population in number? So the number of inhabitants of Anatolia in the 10-11 centuries totaly wrong assumptions.<br /><br />Onur also falsely claimed that "Turkic tribes coming to Anatolia ...came from what is now Kazakhstan very quickly passing through what is now Turkmenistan and Iran"? Really? Have you ever heard Oghuz Yabgu State (750-1055)? You are calling 300 years as a state "quickly passing"? Who says Oghuzes come from eastern Asia? Probably they were always there, before as a part of western Turkish kaghanate, even according to Divan al-Lugat al-Turk before the era of Alexander the Great. Also Turks ruled Persia/Iran in the last millenium until 1920. Is it again a "quickly passing"?Bulan Goldsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08383112370502114428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-89454217794788343262012-04-27T02:15:57.836+03:002012-04-27T02:15:57.836+03:00dienekes,
Can you compare Turks and Turkmens in yo...dienekes,<br />Can you compare Turks and Turkmens in your next researches? <br />it seems turks of turkey are 1/7 uzbek.<br />but im curious about the Turkish-Turkmen comparison.Pecheneghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12048332197518754880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-69591783120231895692012-04-19T00:24:56.334+03:002012-04-19T00:24:56.334+03:00Arslan Giray,
Stop putting words in my mouth. You...Arslan Giray,<br /><br />Stop putting words in my mouth. You are purposefully lying by attributing to me assertions I have never made. Also, my assertions are very different from those of Lars; I don't share many of his views. Lastly, I am free to express my opinions on whatever issue I want.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-63027573453489598822012-01-13T01:19:42.508+02:002012-01-13T01:19:42.508+02:00This haplogroup is said to be valid in Serbia and ...<i>This haplogroup is said to be valid in Serbia and Bosnia, at minor rates. So can we assume that these people could be carrying the genetic remnants of the Ottoman Empire?</i><br /><br />I would consider Avars a much more likely source of haplogroup N for the Balkans, also Magyars and assorted peoples of ultimate eastern origin. <br /><br />It is of course possible that some N in the Balkans is of Ottoman or Seljuk origin, but I don't think it is currently well understood which is which, because N occurs overall at extremely low frequencies in either the Balkans or Anatolia and has never been the object of a proper study.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-7849183563023686802012-01-13T00:12:51.093+02:002012-01-13T00:12:51.093+02:00Thank you for the informative response. I've r...Thank you for the informative response. I've read on some sources that haplogroup N is also existent in the Balkans. This haplogroup is said to be valid in Serbia and Bosnia, at minor rates. So can we assume that these people could be carrying the genetic remnants of the Ottoman Empire? Any possibility of mixed Slavic hordes bringing this haplogroup to the Balkans? I am relatively interested in the background of this haplogroup's connection with the Balkans and Anatolia, particularly because my paternal ancestors have migrated from the Balkans to Turkey.(I cannot trace when or if they settled in the Balkans during/after the Balkan inquisition of the Ottoman Empire)Boran Dedeogluhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01227026022881455912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-36467102980718862262012-01-12T23:43:05.692+02:002012-01-12T23:43:05.692+02:00Haplogroup N in itself is not uniquely associated ...Haplogroup N in itself is not uniquely associated with Turkic speakers. Determining whether a particular haplogroup-N chromosome was carried by a Turkic speaker depends on context. For example, if a Swede carries this haplogroup, it's more likely that he had a Finnic ancestor. In the case of Anatolian Turks, a reasonable explanation is that haplogroup-N was part of the Turkic speakers that settled in Anatolia from Central Asia.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-25386411307975525542012-01-12T23:07:46.615+02:002012-01-12T23:07:46.615+02:00Dear Sir,
I am curios as in which way does the Y...Dear Sir, <br /><br />I am curios as in which way does the Y haplogroup N fit in to this model. Did this haplogroup enter Anatolia via the Turkic immigration patterns? Is there any link between this haplogroup and the indigenous Anatolian population? Its only found in Anatolia at a rate of %4. It is also dispersed around different regions of Anatolia. <br />Thank youBoran Dedeogluhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01227026022881455912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-89409489249436336452011-06-01T17:02:19.686+03:002011-06-01T17:02:19.686+03:00Lastly, your statements like "the way you beh...Lastly, your statements like "the way you behave is embarrassing to anyone with the smallest amount of social understanding" and "it's evident to anyone that wants to partake in this project" mean nothing, as you - or anyone else - are in no position to know what others think on these matters. Also, you are in no position to know whether I have self respect or not.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-6788593261321364582011-05-29T00:36:59.995+03:002011-05-29T00:36:59.995+03:00You don't only communicate your beliefs, you s...<i>You don't only communicate your beliefs, you shove them down peoples' throats.</i><br /><br />I don't think I have done anything like that. <br /><br /><i>I am most certainly in a position to know whether you have self respect, you have demonstrated that thoroughly throughout the time I have been a participant of this project. Your incessant posting in light of warnings and resilience to offence further proves my point.</i><br /><br />I will certainly avoid triple postings from now on. But that has nothing to do with whether I have self respect or not.<br /><br /><i>The way you behave is embarrassing to anyone with the smallest amount of social understanding. I hate seeing your posts every time I sign on to Dodecad. I'm not going to sit here arguing with you about your lack of self-respect, it's evident to anyone that wants to partake in this project, all I ask you is to tone down your posting, because you are extremely annoying.</i><br /><br />If you hate my comments, there is nothing I can do to avoid that. But there is something you can do: just skip my comments.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-49906991528879809702011-05-28T15:56:10.617+03:002011-05-28T15:56:10.617+03:00Why should I stop posting? Are you in a position t...<i>Why should I stop posting? Are you in a position to know whether I have self respect or not, how much do you know me? What makes you think that I am imposing myself on others? And why is the way I behave embarassing for you?*<br /><br />* I am asking the questions on my own behalf, not on Lars'.</i><br /><br />Because you are irritating. You don't only communicate your beliefs, you shove them down peoples' throats. I am most certainly in a position to know whether you have self respect, you have demonstrated that thoroughly throughout the time I have been a participant of this project. Your incessant posting in light of warnings and resilience to offence further proves my point. <br /><br />The way you behave is embarrassing to anyone with the smallest amount of social understanding. I hate seeing your posts every time I sign on to Dodecad. I'm not going to sit here arguing with you about your lack of self-respect, it's evident to anyone that wants to partake in this project, all I ask you is to tone down your posting, because you are extremely annoying.kitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12486016853835944779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-36154759540471113822011-05-26T19:34:03.355+03:002011-05-26T19:34:03.355+03:00Onur and Lars,
Please do a huge service to the on...<i>Onur and Lars,<br /><br />Please do a huge service to the online anthropology community and stop posting. Have some self respect, stop imposing yourselves on everyone, it's embarrassing to see the way you behave.</i><br /><br /><b>Questions:</b> Why should I stop posting? Are you in a position to know whether I have self respect or not, how much do you know me? What makes you think that I am imposing myself on others? And why is the way <b>I</b> behave embarassing for <b>you</b>?*<br /><br />* I am asking the questions on my own behalf, not on Lars'.<br /><br /><i>I concur. It is a good idea for people to show some restraint in their posting by combining all their thoughts into one comment, and being on point and concise.</i><br /><br />I am very sorry for the triple posting, Dieneke. I will never repeat that again.<br /><br />BTW, my first attempt to post this comment was unsuccessful due to server error, so I am posting it the second time.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-74113849596513437692011-05-26T18:33:31.941+03:002011-05-26T18:33:31.941+03:00BTW, I hate to be transgressing the blog rules by ...<i>BTW, I hate to be transgressing the blog rules by triple posting, but it seems no one other than me is posting comments in this thread anymore, so I couldn't wait for someone else to post a comment before posting this comment.</i><br /><br />You have a one-way ticket back to ban-land if you don't stop immediately posting every thought that comes into your brain. The rule of the blog is "avoid double-posting" it is not double-post every single time (and if I hadn't deleted one of your countless "corrections" you'd have 4 back-to-back posts in this post.<br /><br /><i>Please do a huge service to the online anthropology community and stop posting. Have some self respect, stop imposing yourselves on everyone, it's embarrassing to see the way you behave.</i><br /><br />I concur. It is a good idea for people to show some restraint in their posting by combining all their thoughts into one comment, and being on point and concise.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-76318362570852640792011-05-26T16:24:55.354+03:002011-05-26T16:24:55.354+03:00Onur and Lars,
Please do a huge service to the on...Onur and Lars,<br /><br />Please do a huge service to the online anthropology community and stop posting. Have some self respect, stop imposing yourselves on everyone, it's embarrassing to see the way you behave.kitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12486016853835944779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-89858817433992346562011-05-25T21:12:58.549+03:002011-05-25T21:12:58.549+03:00Because uniparental genetic tests done so far indi...<i>Because uniparental genetic tests done so far indicate that Tajiks of Uzbekistan are genetically generally less East Asian and more Caucasoid than ethnic Uzbeks (the dominant Turkic group in Uzbekistan) of Uzbekistan.</i><br /><br />Also autosomal genetic tests.<br /><br />BTW, I hate to be transgressing the blog rules by triple posting, but it seems no one other than me is posting comments in this thread anymore, so I couldn't wait for someone else to post a comment before posting this comment.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.com