Interesting !

[Kanki]

Re: Interesting !

turks and turkics in general could not belong to the jepethic race because at the time of Jepeth (assuming he did exist), they were all mongoloid, Jepeth is the "ancestor" of the Cacausian peoples.

Anything taught in turkey is most likely not true.

Have you got scientific evidence about that Turks are Mongolid ?

[MrHyeSev]

Re: Interesting !

You do know that the Bible is just a bunch of metaphors, stories and myths, right?

Anonymouse what parts?

[Kanki]

Re: Interesting !

I thought history teachers were supoused to teach History not xxxish myths lol. But it's turkey they still are saying there wasn't a genocide. So what can you expect.

Turks (55%) accept genocide. But East Ottoman soldiers were not Turkish (mostly Kurd)

[Armanen]

Re: Interesting !

Have you got scientific evidence about that Turks are Mongolid ?

I shouldn't be the one to tell you that turkish is part of altaic family of languages which also includes the other turkic/mongolic and tungusic languages. Plus, it is a well known historical fact that turks first moved into Asia Minor and the Armenian Highlands from Central Asia and what is now the western parts of modern Mongolia. The oghuz, the seljuks and the ottomans being the primary turkic tribes that invaded Asia Minor were all mongolid, not cacausian.

[Kanki]

Re: Interesting !

I shouldn't be the one to tell you that turkish is part of altaic family of languages which also includes the other turkic/mongolic and tungusic languages. Plus, it is a well known historical fact that turks first moved into Asia Minor and the Armenian Highlands from Central Asia and what is now the western parts of modern Mongolia. The oghuz, the seljuks and the ottomans being the primary turkic tribes that invaded Asia Minor were all mongolid, not cacausian.

No Turks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

[yerazhishda]

Re: Interesting !

No Turks

Ok, Mongol.

"The first historical text to mention the Turks was from the standpoint of the Chinese, who mentioned trade of Turk tribes with the Sogdians along the Silk Road. The Xiongnu mentioned in Han Dynasty records may have been Proto-Turkic speakers, followed by the Hun hordes of Attila that tried to conquer Europe. On the other hand, recent genetics research dated 2003 confirms the studies indicating that the Turkic people originated from the same area and therefore are possibly related with the Xiongnu."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_peoples#Turkic_roots

[jgk3]

Re: Interesting !

modern turks are quite caucasoid actually, having absorbed the ethnicities of the land they came to dominate at a faster rate than Turkic nomads from Central Asia came to join their ranks.

[ara87]

Re: Interesting !

I think it's been pretty much determined today that human life started in Africa, and while there was a great flood when the barrier between the Mediterranean broke causing, a lake to become the black sea, the world has never been completely flooded all at once, and there have been people in all corners of the world including the Americas before 10,000 years ago. The story of Noah is more a parable based on a regional event to teach people to obey God, and nothing more. Jesus taught in parables so why wouldn't the old testament be taught in the same way? Also those traditional views only became so engrained and accepted b/c people wanted a reason to justify things, (ham was cursed to be a slave to his brothers), so it was ok that the xxxs took land from all those -ites peoples b/c they were his descendants, or it was ok to enslave africans b/c they were descended from ham.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Interesting !

I think it's been pretty much determined today that human life started in Africa,

What? I must have missed something. Last I heard, scientists had merely a theory. When was this "determined"? Determination involves certainty and knowledge, not theorizing and approximation, which is what scientists claim so far. It is based on the assumption of evolution being true. It is accepted as fact that all women are descended from the African "Eve". This conclusion was based upon mtDNA studies which assume that its only inherited only from mothers. This assumption has been repeated so much now that it has become an infallible "fact". Other recent studies would suggest that some paternal mtDNA actually does get into eggs and recombines with maternal mtDNA. Moreover, the "African Eve" theory has been challenged so much that it is believed that it is only the mother of sub-Saharan black Africans.

J. Hey and E. Harris, have presented data suggesting that the famous African Eve was the mother of only modern sub-Saharan Africans and everyone else descended from an entirely different Eves.

Source: Pennisi, Elizabeth; "Genetic Study Shakes Up Out of Africa Theory," Science, 283:1828, 1999. Bower, B.; "DNA Data Yield New Human-Origins View," Science News, 155:181, 1999.)

[Anonymouse]

Re: Interesting !

Ok, Mongol.

"The first historical text to mention the Turks was from the standpoint of the Chinese, who mentioned trade of Turk tribes with the Sogdians along the Silk Road. The Xiongnu mentioned in Han Dynasty records may have been Proto-Turkic speakers, followed by the Hun hordes of Attila that tried to conquer Europe. On the other hand, recent genetics research dated 2003 confirms the studies indicating that the Turkic people originated from the same area and therefore are possibly related with the Xiongnu."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_...s#Turkic_roots

Stop the insults please. I don't care what the Turk says. Turk or no Turk, baseless name calling is discouraged.