OFFTOPIC: Kurds as Indo-Europeans & Indo-European haplogroups

[Goga]

My views are shared by most Eupedia. Why can't you be open-minded enough to atleast consider it? Read Maciamo's threads about it. He explains it really well.

No, ask Maiamo one more time. According to Maciamo proto-Indo-Europeans were 'darker' than modern Nordics.

Don't believe in nonsense on forumbiodiversity.

 

[Templar]

I don't go on forumbiodiversity. They have out-dated views and use out-dated terminology. This is what Maciamo said: "Neolithic to Bronze-Age steppe people appear to have had Proto-Europoid features (mixed European and Mongoloid features, although probably not slanted eyes), like wide, thick-boned faces and low skulls, which was quickly lost when they interbred with other Europeans. They almost certainly carried with them the genetic mutations for blue eyes, fair hair and red hair, as these can be found in all the regions of Eurasia that they colonised, including in the 4000 year-old Tarim mummies."

 

[jjmuneer123]

Well you know I just happen to be the only "cro-magnon" Kurd right? Well I showed you a picture gallery of my tribe, a minority of light hair and eyes, majority being robush and dolicephalic.

It can be flawed in many ways.

In waht way exactly?

There are many, just one example is Dolph Lundgren.

That is only one example, why don't you show me crowds or pictures of other Swedes. And anyways Dolph is Nordic+CM, not Nordic alone.
This is a textbook Nordic: Seems to be dolicephalic, very refined. You wouldn't say this typica is typical? I mean even Scandavians themselves say it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting there aren't any robust Nordic types, just like there are alot of Robust Iranid types, but your over-exaggerating the numbers. Most North-western europeans, are more refined in features.

Ideal for cold climates.

I would of thought it was the other way around, considering scandavians and highlander Kurds are the opposite, but whatever.

They don't exist as a unique sunrace, they are a mix.

Your getting confused, Alpine in itself is meant to be sub-divided into different sub-races as I stated them before.

Indo-Europeans had horses, great numbers, and bronze weapons. The majority of native Europeans were still hunter-gatherers. They got completely massacred.

My views are shared by most Eupedia. Why can't you be open-minded enough to atleast consider it? Read Maciamo's threads about it. He explains it really well.

If you views are shared by other members, that doesn't render it to be correct or the right one. If these so called native europeans were massacred by indo-europeans, then why is it their y-dna isn't R1a1a. Surely if the paternal lingeage was killed off, then R1a would eb much more common in southern Europe, and South-eastern Europe like Bosnia.

 

[Goga]

It’s ok mate. I'm just sensitive on this issue since Kurdish enemies, like Turks, Assyrians, Armenians, Arabs are denying out identity and try to wipe us and our language out.

According to Turks Kurds are Turkish. Kurdish was and is a forbidden language in Turkey

According to Arabs Kurds are Arabic. Saddam used chemical weapons against us.

According to Assyrians Kurds are Assyrians and our homeland Kurdistan is actually Assyria.

According toA rmenians Kurds are Armenian and our homeland Kurdistan is actually Armenia.

If you deny somebodies existence he revolts and goes in rebellion, and this is what I'm doing. If Kurdistan was independent I wouldn't even bother you and interfere here.

 

[jjmuneer123]

I don't go on forumbiodiversity. They have out-dated views and use out-dated terminology. This is what Maciamo said: "Neolithic to Bronze-Age steppe people appear to have had Proto-Europoid features (mixed European and Mongoloid features, although probably not slanted eyes), like wide, thick-boned faces and low skulls, which was quickly lost when they interbred with other Europeans. They almost certainly carried with them the genetic mutations for blue eyes, fair hair and red hair, as these can be found in all the regions of Eurasia that they colonised, including in the 4000 year-old Tarim mummies."

Blue eyes developed somewhere around the caspian sea region. And light features doesn't imply them to be Nordic.
Here is some reconstructions of the skulls found at Andronovo burial sites:



Funnily enough they appear Iranid, just like this Pashtun and Kurd:

 

[Templar]

This is a textbook Nordic

All the "textbook" things can't be taken seriously. They developed during a time when racial supremacy was commonly believed and enforced. North-Western European countries ended up dominating the world, and they wanted to have a "justification" for it. They knew about how in the past Indo-Europeans conquered huge swathes of territories, and so they wanted to associate with them. You to go beyond the propaganda and look at the data.

Well I showed you a picture gallery of my tribe, a minority of light hair and eyes, majority being robush and dolicephalic.

You did? I didn't see your link. Mind posting it again?

Most North-western europeans, are more refined in features.

Due to the neolithic migrations of farmers from the near-east.

Your getting confused, Alpine in itself is meant to be sub-divided into different sub-races as I stated them before.

It doesn't matter what it was intended as, since its very use is flawed.

If these so called native europeans were massacred by indo-europeans, then why is it their y-dna isn't R1a1a. Surely if the paternal lingeage was killed off, then R1a would eb much more common in southern Europe, and South-eastern Europe like Bosnia.

Their conquests were mostly limited to plains. Areas which were isolated (such as the Dinarid mountain range) were impacted much less. Also, Southern Europe was civilization-wise (agriculture) on par with the Middle-East, so they weren't affected as much as Northern Europe was.

 

[Templar]

It’s ok mate. I'm just sensitive on this issue since Kurdish enemies, like Turks, Assyrians, Armenians, Arabs are denying out identity and try to wipe us and our language out.

I know how that feels. It is a terrible feeling. I myself as a Bosnian am constantly bombarded with propaganda saying that I am Serb or Croat. I think we started off on the wrong foot.

 

[Templar]

Blue eyes developed somewhere around the caspian sea region. And light features doesn't imply them to be Nordic.

That doesn't go against my theories. It could have been Central Asia I.E. the Indo-European homeland.

Here is some reconstructions of the skulls found at Andronovo burial sites:

Where is the location of Andronovo? Can you link me a map.

 

[jjmuneer123]

Here are some of my tribesmen:
http://oi49.tinypic.com/2rw9m9v.jpg

 

[Templar]

About Andronovo, look at this:

The skulls from Andronovo comfortably match modern Central and Eastern European crania in terms of complex metric and non-metric traits. The "Caucasoids" here are modern Slavs (inc. Poles), and fit right in the middle of the Indo-Iranian samples.

[TABLE="class: ncode_imageresizer_warning, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD="class: td1, width: 20"]

[/TD]
[TD="class: td2"]Click this bar to view the full image.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[Templar]

Jjumuneer, I am not trying to attack your identity, culture, language, or anything. I am just saying that Kurds are a mix of Indo-Europeans and the Middle/Near-Eastern people that were there already. There is nothing wrong with the Middle/Near-East. That is the cradle of civilization. Most Europeans have atleast some Middle/Near-Eastern ancestry.

 

[jjmuneer123]

Well Kurds on DNA tribes have the highest Indo-Iranian component, known as 'Persian'. Showing we have preserved our indo-Iranian lingeage much more strongly than our neighbours.
Here this link shows it:
http://img547.imageshack.us/img547/3473/75590976.jpg
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/4255/23442613.jpg

 

[jjmuneer123]

Jjumuneer, I am not trying to attack your identity, culture, language, or anything. I am just saying that Kurds are a mix of Indo-Europeans and the Middle/Near-Eastern people that were there already. There is nothing wrong with the Middle/Near-East. That is the cradle of civilization. Most Europeans have atleast some Middle/Near-Eastern ancestry.

My friend why would I be ashamed of being a west asian? Lol but you can just look at my results of 23andme and my mcdonald's anayalsis, clearly I have a strong indo-Iranian component, along with the rest of my tribe. No one is denying that there is also a strong native component amongst Kurds, that would be stupid to do so. Though I think you just don't believe in phenotypes. Personally I believe phenotypes can change over time. Even the 'Ice lady' found in Altai mountains is indo-Iranian and looks it. She possess those Iranid features of a hooked nose and dolicephically.

 

[Templar]

Well Kurds on DNA tribes have the highest Indo-Iranian component, known as 'Persian'. Showing we have preserved our indo-Iranian lingeage much more strongly than our neighbours.

I don't disagree with you.

Here this link shows it:

That is a very cool map.

The thing that I am arguing is that the reason why Kurds and surrounding people might look "Nordic" isn't because Indo-Europeans had similar facial features, but rather because the original Scandinavians were close cousins to Near-Eastern people. Haplogroup IJ split into I and J. J stayed in the near/middle East, while I went into Europe. Please don't spread the old theories that were created by imperialists to justify genocide and conquest. Indo-Europeans looked like Celts and Slavs mostly. But I guess the combination of Indo-European genes with Middle Eastern ones can create a similar appearance to the Nordic one because both are combination of similar lineages.

 

[Templar]

Lol but you can just look at my results of 23andme and my mcdonald's anayalsis, clearly I have a strong indo-Iranian component, along with the rest of my tribe. No one is denying that there is also a strong native component amongst Kurds, that would be stupid to do so. Though I think you just don't believe in phenotypes. Personally I believe phenotypes can change over time. Even the 'Ice lady' found in Altai mountains is indo-Iranian and looks it. She possess those Iranid features of a hooked nose and dolicephically.

Look at what I posted about Andronovo. It says their skulls are most similar to East Europeans. That is exactly what I was saying all along!

 

[Templar]

Oh and here is where I found it:
http://anthrocivitas.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2428

 

[jjmuneer123]

Look at what I posted about Andronovo. It says their skulls are most similar to East Europeans. That is exactly what I was saying all along!

I would diagree slightly. Modern day slavs are usually not long faced. Whilst all those skulls look like Kurdish skulls, and I see this from first hand experience. You can even see those pictures I sent you, they are quite represent of Kurds from my area.


My maternal haplogroup is T1 which was actually found in frequencies up to 20% in central asia in andronovo burial sites:

Twenty samples were found to belong to west Eurasian haplogroups (U2, U4,
U5a1, T1, T3, T4, H5a, H6, HV, K, and I), whereas the 6 remaining samples were attributed to east Eurasian haplogroups (Z, G2a, C, F1b and N9a).​

http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/more-on-prehistoric-south-siberians.html

 

[Yetos]

I don't go on forumbiodiversity. They have out-dated views and use out-dated terminology. This is what Maciamo said: "Neolithic to Bronze-Age steppe people appear to have had Proto-Europoid features (mixed European and Mongoloid features, although probably not slanted eyes), like wide, thick-boned faces and low skulls, which was quickly lost when they interbred with other Europeans. They almost certainly carried with them the genetic mutations for blue eyes, fair hair and red hair, as these can be found in all the regions of Eurasia that they colonised, including in the 4000 year-old Tarim mummies."

Blue eyes and fair hair in Tarim basin mummies?

I think they are red hair and from Anatolian origin, Tocharians were Anatolian tribe not not Eurasian steppe people,
and surely non big cheeks and round head, but the opposite

I think you are connecting Baltic female mutations of Blondism, as also the old pre-IE race of alpine type with IE,

A question, Blond straight hairs are they IE like?

Which looks like IE?

Can you tell us which one of the above IE look like?

 

[Templar]

Whilst all those skulls look like Kurdish skulls

I keep telling you this, Indo-Europeans didn't have long skulls. Wherever they went, they left people with broader skills. For example I once read an article saying that light-haired Greeks were more likely to have wide faces than dark-haired Greeks. The only place that has a large concentration of thin-faced light-haired Indo-Europeans is Scandinavia. That is the EXCEPTION not the rule. But the popularization of the term "Nordic" has made this false belief so common. Please just look at the evidence, the haplogroups, you aren't going to lose a part of you just because most Kurds have skulls that are generally different from Indo-Europeans. You will still have the light phenotype.

 

[Templar]

A question, Blond straight hairs are they IE like?

Yes, they are.

I think they are red hair and from Anatolian origin, Tocharians were Anatolian tribe not not Eurasian steppe people,
and surely non big cheeks and round head, but the opposite

They were sampled to test their haplogroups, and I think it said that most if not all of them were R1a (not R1b which spread from Anatolia)