Affiliate Marketing Secrets

I installed an antivirus program on my phone, AVG to be exact because they have protected my computer well for years, but can mobile phones running Android, Windows, Apple really get infected from viruses?

This question here I believe is a big one that the entire human race needs to rethink.
Which animals deserve protection? How do we choose which animals to protect by law and which ones not to protect? Which animals should we rightly kill and when does killing cross the line? The human race appears confused when it comes to these questions as we have a large tendency to contradict ourselves ( of course we contradict ourselves in most everything we do! ) Here is a proposed way to answer these questions.
RELAVANCE!!!! If an ant is killed either on accident, on purpose, or eaten for food. Its life can be easily replaced by another in the hive. Ants reproduce quickly so a single casualty is not much of a loss. The blandings turtle takes up to 15 years to reach sexual maturity. A single death of an adult or juvinile blandings turtle has the potential to influence the entire population! Therefore by the relevance theory the blandings turtle should recieve more legal protection than the ant.
All theories have flaws when it comes to philosophy! Of course I know we should never stick with just one but bring together a diversity of ideas to formulate our own personal opinion. Here are some of the flaws I have identified with the Relevance theory.
1. Endangered species- If an animal population is dying out who is to say if the species is worth saving or not? Once a species becomes rare its ecological significance usualy drops.
Ex: the giant panda feeds mainly on bamboo, which was previously a plentyful resource. Today bamboo is scarce so humans spend tons of money trying to save the pandas. Because the need for a creature to keep bamboo in check is gone, the panda no longer serves as important of a niche. How do we decide if it is worth saving or not?
2. Invasive species- when are they beneficial and when aren’t they? Should we judge this solely on how well it fits into a new niche?
Ex: Burmese pythons are loose in southern United States. Some argue that they do not belong and eat animals that shouldn’t be eaten. Others argue that humans destroyed other predators that previously fed on these animals and the snakes are taking advantage of a wide open niche. What should we do?
3. Personal preference- don’t lie to yourself, humans favor some animals over others just because we want to. Cats and dogs will always have more protection than snakes and insects. When is it approperiate to listen to reason and when is it aproperiate to listen to our personal desires?
Ex: Lets say a feral cat comes by and eats a pet duck. Now lets say a burmese python comes by and eats a pet duck. For killing the snake I would be praised for removing an innvasive species, for killing the cat I could be arrested for animal cruelty.
I tried to keep this question neutral ( although bias is inevitable ). When answering look at these details as topics for discusion, do not hold them as my own personal opinions!
If you also believe this is an important thing for humans to consider star this question as important!

.
Raw mineral is not like crops that can be harvested annually but used up eventually. China should protect her limited amount of raw minerals before it is too late.
Furthermore, in the old days, Chinese people didnt have a correct concept about enviromental protection thus kept mining in a damaging way to the environment and human health. Now, Chinese people have come to realize how wrong they were for keep damaging the environment and the health of Chinese people through the way they mined.
Now, the WTO is helping its affiliates to continue to exploit China’s limited amount of raw minerals and the WTO deliberately ignores the Chinese people’s health and China’s environment, by filing a ruling against China.
The filing shows clearly that the WTO is not an orgainization deserves any respects from China and 1.5 billions of Chinese people world wide. China does not need to respect the ruling of WTO which actually has motives to hurt the health and best interest of innocent Chinese civilians like what the westerners and japanese did 100 years ago..
Can WTO people answer my question if it is their ulterior motive to killing the innocent Chinese civilians ?
.
.

I am developing a proposal for a technological tool, that will be marketed with intentions to provide a greater amount of protection for the safety of our children. I need percentage and statistical numbers to use that are accurate, span over period of years to show incline or decline of margins, and are attainable from reliable references.
I need this data to be associated with the following criteria:
percentage of missing people
percentage of missing children
percentage of child abductions, by family, associates, friends, and strangers
percentage of children molested by people within a community, such as neighbors, local business affiliates or strangers
Thank you in advance for the help