Are modern Turks Indo-European Anatolians?

>>2631349
no

>>2631349
Genetically yes, great map by the way

File: 1780.jpg (214KB, 900x548px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 900x548px

>>2631349

>>2631375
>Sardinia part of the caliphate

This dumb meme triggers me

>>2631382
i still dont understand how the city of rome is still a thing and hasnt been razed to the point of unrecognisable charred remains multiple multiple times just for good meassure.

>>2631349

Culturally? No. Racially? No. Linguistically? No.

>>2631349
Mostly, yes.

>>2631349

Yes. Only 15% of Turks have any connection to Central Asia. The rest are indigenous Anatolians. So why do they speak Turkish? Here's why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya

>>2631729

Then why do I hate turks so much still

>>2631729
They didint speak Turkish in Ottoman empire you dumbfuck

No

They're Neolithic farmers

>>2631349
As a Turk, I say yes.
Read: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2753/AAE1061-1959500101

No because the original Anatolians were invaders who barely left any genetic impact in Anatolia in the first place. The Hittites usurped the pre-IE Hattians.

Modern Turks are in fact pre-IE-anatolian-grecko-roman-armenia-turkic rape bladda and the genetics blur together hard.

File: Sardegna-Stemma.svg.png (215KB, 904x1023px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 904x1023px

>>2631375
>Sardinia

REEEEEEEEEEE. THEY ONLY HELD A SMALL PART FOR TWO MONTHS.

>>2631789
What?