Turkey brings more value to NATO then Sweden and Finland combined. It has a standing army (2nd biggest after US in NATO) with combat experience, defense sector with proven capabilities. Not to mention 11th economy in the world by GDP PPP and growing.
It's better for Turkey and NATO, that Turkey is in NATO. I would say it's far more important than Sweden or Finland being in NATO.
On account of Turkey, it hosts worlds largest number number of refugees.[1] But gets almost no recognition for it.
6 billions of euros EU thought of paying accounts only for a small amount of what it has costed to Turkish taxpayers which are a lot poorer than their, for example, German counterparts.
Yeah, I know. A lot of countries with much less resources and wealth than the EU host a lot more people. Which commendable. And shows that it is purely a lack of pilotical will on behalf of the EU to do more.
And still Erdogan used refugees to gain concessions and favors from the EU.
Indeed oldest known surviving buildings are thought to be of religious and monumental in nature.[1] As far as we know it could be the religion which made people settle and do agriculture. [2]
If we went with latter we would need more land to feed same number of people. There is more "nature" when we leave the forest as is and not cut it down to, to convert it to a poorly run "human land".
> There were more cereal calories per person in 2020 than in 1992. And this abundance was brought about without massive increases in the area being farmed. While industrial emissions rocketed, emissions due to land-use change fell by a quarter.
We were able to more than triple our output in that period.
What's good for you doesn't mean it's good for the planet. Cotton requires insane amount of water, land. On the other hand, there must be other reasons why cotton is not the best choice for outdoor wear.
Guardian dogs. In other parts of the world shepherds have been living with wolves and bears since forever with the help of their companions. These are huge dogs, intelligent but independent. They roam and fend off bears, jackals and wolves and from my own experience, unfortunate hikers and cyclists.
There are many projects currently underway, introducing these dogs to America, Europe and Africa, as an alternative to killing on sight.
It's usually too late by the time help arrives in an avalanche scenario. If something happens you could have about 15 minutes to rescue your partner(s). You must NOT go alone. Get a course in snow rescue, find experienced people and go with them. Be alert. Always carry a basic avalanche rescue kit: a modern beacon, a probe and a shovel.
And, if you must, you could get a Cospas-Sarsat PLB in addition to your avalanche beacon.
Increasing the efficiency on existing farmlands should be the goal. Best way to reduce harm to the soil, ecosystem, nature is if we didn't require that much land. Maybe we can't decrease our usage just yet, but we can increase the efficiencies and decrease the demand for more farmland. Even an organic farmland is desert compared a forest.
I don't follow, forests are great but if the farmland you are using gets ruined you need to do something... right now something is usually more petro-fertilizer and pesticides, and occasionally more traditional methods at smaller scales.
It's great if you can use less land for farming, but if concentration leads to the land being damaged beyond repair then what's the point? You'd just have to turn unused land into farmland, and if you're doing that you may as well use crop rotation intentionally.
If you need to deposit massive amounts of natural gas (used to make hydrogen used to make ammonia) on a small amount of land instead of using a larger amount of land and using slower methods to get nitrogen in the soil... there is surely a stable point where the soil is continually usable without needing a lot of fertilizer.
It's better for Turkey and NATO, that Turkey is in NATO. I would say it's far more important than Sweden or Finland being in NATO.