Imagine being a Byzantine, imagine you lost more than half of your clay to Bulgarians, Arabs and other barbarians, but then you manage to recover and reconquer northern levant, Bulgaria, Balkans and Armenia.
Then this guy appears
>>3071398
High test as fuck. Would gladly be cucked by.
>>3071398
That's just a native Anatolian, the average Byzantine probably looked like that.
The Turks looked like this when they first rolled in
>>3071417
Actually wrong
Turks descended from Turkmens, not Kazakhs. That means Turks were enriched by Persians. So the look varied from persian to half mongoloid. Like pic related.
>>3071417
Alpha fingol, alpha horse and alpha bird. Greeks never stood a chance.
>>3071425
Bullshit. We can't use modern phenotypes to guess ancient ones.
For all we know, Seljuks were enriched by the Scyths just as the Tatars are.
>>3071425
Turks have nothing to do with Turkmenistan anyway, like less than 5% Central Asian
>>3071443
Are you sure about that, underage armchair geneticist?
Do you actually want me to post Eurogenes results to buttblast you again?
>>3071447
Read this chart carefully, it's facts and you can't deny it.
>>3071451
"read this chart carefully"
You do realize you're the only guy who can't read the chart right? it's like you're totally trying to cover that the turk mongol dna ranges from 5% to 25%?
>facts
now let's talk about actual genetics.
>>3071454
Because it's accurate, mohammed
>>3071458
It literally is not.
You're that buttblasted rapebaby or that retarded romeaboo amerifat that's been trying to memeforce "le elite domination theory" by shitposting about knowing nothing about actual genetics, central asian/turkish history.
>>3071466
shitposting about it while knowing*
>>3071458
It's not fully accurate and you see whatever you want in it.
>>3071466
What a retarded cockroach, that chart is super accurate and using all the latest tools
And if anything what you posted confirms what I said, retard.
>>3071454
Well the Seljuks were probably varied in their looks. Otherwise i'd not look chink. But i don't think they looked pure mongoloid at all. As an another anon said they probably looked from Persian to Half-Mongoloid.
>>3071469
Silence fatty.
>And if anything what you posted confirms what I said, retard.
You said:
>turks are not related to Turkmens
>only 5% maybe
meanwhile an average Turk is more than 50% related to Turkmens, 25% to 80% on average depending how how much Mongoloid/West Asian dna a Turk has.
Now please read a book, learn about genetic calculators on gedmatch and then come back.
I also suggest you to read about Seljuk/Oghuz/Early Ottoman history.
I suggest you this
https://www.amazon.com/History-Seljuks-Kafesoglus-Interpretation-Controversy/dp/0809314142
>>3071476
Mongoloid+Persian isn't the full mix.
Western Turkic people descend also from East Scythians. Turkmen mixing with Persians dilluted both.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14615
>>3071494
By Persian i also meant Eastern Iranic peoples.
>>3071511
Iranians are genetically extremely distinct from them and Tajiks aren't identical either although they at least have something to do with them.
East Scythians were their own thing despite linguistic ties.
>>3071520
Not entirely sure about that. But they were a caucasoid people, not mongoloid.
>>3071523
East Scythians became progressively more Mongoloid admixed over the centuries. West Scythians did too but more like in a Finn-tier way.
It's all in the paper.
Still, Turkmen aren't just East_Scythian+Mongol but heavily Iranian as well.
>>3071398
so some butthurt armenian went in and painted a monobrow, a mustache, hair and an ataturk tatoo on the guy
what the fuck famalams
>>3071398
Thrace was pretty much already lost when the Bulgarians got there.