most of the people of Turkey, the ethnic "Turks" have very little Turkic blood in them -- they look and have very little true blood relationship with the Kipchaks or Turkomen or Kirghiz. But they have the same language family.
They are mostly ethnically greek-hittite-hatti-armenian-caucasian mix with some semitic elements and some traces of Turks. This is where the rulers (Turks) put their language on the conquered
You are as usual correct. Anatolia, the bulk of what is now modern day Turkey, has been occupied over many millenia by so many different peoples and languages (and religions) that to call all the current descendants "Turks" is just a modern convenience and a product of the Turkish government's need to enforce national unity at all costs. The "real" Turks are more to be found in places like Turkmenistan and the other ex-Soviet Turkic republics. The Ugyur in Xinjiang Province in China are another example.
One thing that struck me during my first visit to Turkey (via Italy and Greece) was that the variation from the expected "Mediterranean" type (black hair and dark olive complexion) seemed to increase as I traveled east. I saw more blondes in Greece and then in Istanbul than in Rome. Of course part of that is the intermixing the Ottomans forced on the Balkan peoples during the centuries of Dhimmitude and Devshirme selection of the best and brightest into slavery.