Wouldn't it be great to have billions of African people and no animal wild life?

Answer 1

You need to expand a bit more on your question, maybe more than a bit more, if you want an intelligent answer. For instance, how do YOU define "African" people? For, as far as I am aware, every single race is to be found in Africa, by the millions. Also, are you permitting domesticated animal life? Or inferring that "African" people may be equated to animal wildlife? In any event, I hope and pray that you are just playing the fool in asking your question, and that you are not serious. Have a good day in the meantime.

Answer 2

The premise of this question is so appallingly racist I am rather stunned. Why not ask, wouldn't it be great to have hundreds of millions of energy-sucking, resource-guzzling Americans and no animal wildlife? I'm an environmentalist, but am totally appalled at so-called "environmentalists" who want to "save the wildlife" at the expense of "hopeless" people (as this questioner wrote in response to Bono's question). If you really care about wildlife, here are some options: 1) work within your own country to make sure wildlife isn't going extinct and has sufficient protected habitat, 2) learn about the value of having economically and socially stable communities in "third world", "wild" places, in order to reduce the threat of poaching and illict bushmeat consumption, 3) support efforts to stabilize the economies of poor countries and strengthen the culture-nature links of local communities.

If North Americans and Europeans want to "save the wildlife" in the Amazon, Africa, or SE Asia, they need to help pay for it. The burden for protection can't be placed solely on people in those regions.

Answer 3

Actually, it would be more interesting to have women, without the feminist movement and everyone respecting one another, and men still acknowledging that some women are fragile and wish to be treated as such, not as equals who want to have the s_ _ _ _ kicked out of her. African, and all other races inclusive with animals of every walk of life.

Answer 4

Why not both? Humans and wildlife are interdependent in our ecosystem; without the wildlife to maintain balance the humans would not survive.

Given the grave situations in Africa right now (and there are many), can you honestly assess the situation and conclude that this is the best case scenario at this time?

Answer 5

No. Wildlife is far more important to the planet than humans are, racial background not withstanding

Answer 6

Absurd notion.

Answer 7

Um, no.

Answer 8

NO!!!