What is more important: feeding a poor child in Africa or spending the money on global warming?

Answer 1

To me it would be feeding a starving child anywhere in this world. Every scientist will admit that there are starving children, but so far not all of them have agreed on Global Warming.

Answer 2

Hard question!
While I would love to see no one go hungry anywhere (and that includes those in the USA-there are hungry folks here too), I feel that if the global warming problem is either slowed down or stopped then there will be more food raised. Key part there is raised-need the land & water to grow the food.
The climate is going to change drastically over the next several years and Canada and Russia will be able to have a longer growing season, where the USA and other countries on that latitude, will be in drought conditions. That means less food folks.
Sad to say, that child in Africa will not be the only one suffering, we will be too.

Answer 3

Feeding a poor child in Africa is more important; you'll make a difference in the child's life. If you spend it on global warming, you'll just be wasting your money. How is this problem going to be solved? Research? (more research takes more energy, more stuff released into the atmosphere, and whalah! More global warming!)

Amelia, do you really belive that overpopulation stuff? How would you like it if people decided not to do anything for you if you were starving and they knew you were starving and they spent their money on "more important things"? And did you know the entire world's population can fit into the state of New Jersey? That's right. Overpopulation is not a problem. People are just too greedy (and that's why there will soon be no land left). ;[

For Nicolas down there: Africa has been dry and arid for as long as anyone knows. A part of it was marvelousoly green and lush about 6000 years ago, but that kinda faded away after God kicked the humans out of the area (yes, I am talking about the Garden of Eden). How is the problem going to be "fixed"? To reduce this "global warming" thing, we'd have to eliminate cars (which people are not going to be happy about), farms (methane - this isn't from me, I heard it from someone else), and factories (the smoke and carbon dioxide) - and a whole bunch of other things. ...And the whole world will fall to pieces, not just Africa. No factories - no food. People aren't going to grow their own; they're so used to buying all that processed crap at the store, they don't know how to grow food (farmers and gardeners are the only ones who will be able to survive; there are very many of them because people are too busy for that kind of stuff... or so they say). How is the fat guy next door going to survive without his daily dose of McDonald's? People say "get rid of global warming", but they expect other people to do it. When everybody expects everybody else to do everything, nothing gets done. Why do you think so many people hate the government?! It's not going to happen, so we might as well do what we can do. We know we can't stop global warming, but we can feed that hungry child in Africa. It will make a difference. That child will know that someone cares, and they will try to be more caring when they grow up.

Answer 4

It is better to save money for the Earth. Colinizing other planets wouldn't help because the atmosphere on other planets is not sutable for life. There isn't enough money in this world to change a planet's atmosphere. Everyone can make a difference by not contributing to Global Warming; using less electricity is one way. When we want to use more electricity, we burn fossil fuels which realeases Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the air which is a greenhouse gas. Therefore, it contributes to Global Warming. There a re other ways of producing electricity but, unfortunately, they harm the environment, too. People can also use cars less, using less gas will help stop Global Warming. People can use bikes to do everyday stuff like grocery shopping, they need the exercise too. We humans have become so lazy.....

Answer 5

Do you realize that global warming has to do a lot in the desertification and aridity in Africa ?

A 2°C increase of temperature means that almost all North African agriculture will disappear.
It also mean a grow of the dry savannah region southern to the Sahara.

2000 years ago, the temperature was lower and there were lions in Northern Africa and all sort of tropical animals... can you imagine how different the climate was ?

And I truly advise you to research satellite pictures of African Lakes 30-40 years ago and now.. you will be amazed !!!

I think both are linked so...

And there is more... both are also linked through the population growth.

Answer 6

I would say feeding the poor child in Africa (or anywhere else for that matter). Of course, I would need to make sure that my money was actually going toward feeding that child and not into some two bit dictator's Swiss bank account.

Answer 7

A better way to ask the question: Which is better: feeding a poor child in Africa or spending money to pass laws to "reduce global warming" which make food and transportation more expensive so that even more poor children go hungry?

Answer 8

Not only Africa but it will hurt the poor here. It is the socialist that thinks the US is using more fossil fuels than we should . It is just political and the weather will do what the weather will do. We can't change it any way. These global warming people should be liable for what they are doing to US .

Answer 9

Easier answer than you think.

Global warming, hands down.

If we don't do something about it there'll be tens of millions of starving children. Take Bangladesh. Barely able to feed itself now. Lots of its agricultural land low enough to be innundated with salt water in storms, ruining it.

It's like asking which is better? Give a homeless man a dollar or build a shelter?

"By mid-century, millions more poor children around the world are likely to face displacement, malnourishment, disease and even starvation unless all countries take action now to slow global warming."

Michael Oppenheimer, professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton University

"By 2080, according to the report, it is likely that 1.1 to 3.2 billion people worldwide will experience water scarcity, 200 to 600 million will be threatened by hunger"

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=143&art_id=nw20070402105933155C940186

Answer 10

Feeding the child in Africa. The earth will take care of itself as it has since before the dawn of man.

A clear majority of climatologists do not support global warming, even if Hollywood says they do.