Well 

Accept it.. "We Turks in Anatolia are the real Turks but all other Turks in central Asia are mixed with Mongolians-that is the reason why we dont look like them-, we are more Turks than them" is not a winning argument. 

Apart from the looks, DNA researches are saying what I am saying basically..

I simply do not say that but I give reference to Arabic, Persian and Chinese sources which clearly depict Turks different than yellow race. By the way i can show you other DNA researches which says otherwise. 

Do anyone know that Karaman Turks(Kipchak by origin) celebrated the end of Ottomans as soon as M. Kemal declared Turkish Republic? They were the strongest rival of Ottomans in Anatolia. Even Ottomans failed to assimilate them.

http://tez.sdu.edu.tr/Tezler/TS00412.pdf

See page 83:

There was another mass migration of Turks during the Mongol invasion of Anatolia.

Some 5 million Turkomans migrated to Anatolia.

Thanks si++

I like this...So neither Greeks nor Armenians can blame Turks for whatever happened in history...It was all their internal affairs..

We don´t know how many Turks came to Anatolia at 11th and 13th century..

How can you say that ´Turks´ came to ´Turkey´ long before the name Turkey existed? They were Mongols spreading into the West, so Mongolians are Turks? or Turks are Mongolians?

As I read it the Mongolian race spread westward into modern day Turkey, previously Mesopatamia, and conquered most of the country, except a few villages in the far west.

 I´m still lost we are talking about the birth of a civilisation, this was way before the Greeks,Sumarins etc. So how can ´Turks´ invade a country that wasn´t even ´Turkish´?

´The Fertile crescent´ consisted of hunter gatherers before the Mongals came there, they exibited modern day farming and the domestication of animal techniques, or are you guys talking a lot later on in time?

What about the kh sound? In Arabic it exists, and Turkish it doesn´t however there are some words in Turkmen that I hear it. For example fear korkh. But Turkish has it as korku

No logic there. Sound changes do occur all the time in all languages. That said, I think kh requires more effort to say. We are trying to find ways to say things more easily. So that´s such an outcome.

I will really appreciate your input on this matter.. You mentioned it once or twice in my columns but you did not come back with a real input..

But we have been covering here 10th century onwards.. As far as I know, there was only one mass population movement from the north east (Caucasia). But it was long time ago and we don´t know if they were from central Asia or not (from Europe?)....I don´t think people were calling themselves Turks at the time..

Well, obviously, we don´t look like Turks in central Asia..Do they lost their Turkishness because of Mongolians? I am not entirely sure.. Because insisting that Turks/Turkmens did not mix with the other races in Anatolia/Mesopotamia but they mixed with Mongolians. So "the Turks in Anatolia are the real Turks but the ones in central Asia are less Turks"   does not have any credibility and genetic map of Turkey is  not supporting that idea either..

But what I learnt recently is that "the effect of slavery in Ottoman times".. According to Halil Inalcik (living-legend Historian), Ottomans used to have around 10.000 slaves from Poland/Russia/Caucasia every year.. This slave trade went on with that pace for almost good 250 years (1500- 175. These slaves were treated better than slaves in the USA and after a certain times released to society..  These salves were mainly brought to Istanbul and then released in Istanbul.. Halil Berktay (another historian) estimates around 2 million slaves got mixed with us.. Their growth/kids etc were not included in that number..

I wonder how many of us are having Polish/Russian roots and how many of them are staunch nationalists ..

Just an interesting thought..

"How can you say that ´Turks´ came to ´Turkey´ long before the name Turkey existed? They were Mongols spreading into the West, so Mongolians are Turks? or Turks are Mongolians?"

Questions by another member

This is a good question. To solve the mystery here, one should be able to answer three basic questions.

1. While Mongols were on their way into Anatolia, they stopped by major Arab cities on their way and made sure all libraries were practically burnt out. WHY?

2. Mongols devastated Ottomans in one large battle near Ankara. The Ottoman Sultan was enslaved. Quite surprisingly however, Mongols first released the defeated and enslaved Ottoman Sultan, then stopped their campaign further West into Anatolia, though there was no one left to stop them. WHY ?

3. Before Mongols hit Ottomans, Ottomans were busy making life miserable for Europeans in the West. One would expect Europeans to take advantage of the loss Ottomans suffered and go for a sweet revenge, with no Ottoman army left to stop them. But that did not happen. No one dared attack Ottomans, even after they were practically plastered by Mongols. WHY?

I shall not offer my own answers to these questions. They are however, worth thinking about - for those interested in Turkic history.

Why are you so sensitive about the genetics of Anatolian Turks? People are what they feel for. Why do you try to prove that we are not Turks genetically? What are you trying to do?

If you feel that you are a Turk then you are a Turk. Who cares about the genetics? (answer: apperantly the likes of you who have some discomfort with the idea of feeling/calling yourself a Turk).

Well central Asian Turks may be more Turk than us genetically (nobody denies that) but they are less Turk than us in some countries. The fact is they are more Russian than Turk (Many  prefer to speak Russian instead of their language and feel more Russian than Turk).

If you call yourself a Turk then what is big matter with that? You know "Ne mutlu Türküm diyene". But if you instead say "Ne mutlu ...im diyene" that´s OK we understand that! (That´s what you are trying to do, right?)