The problem with the Global Warming debate is that it is not a debate about a single question. There are actually four questions.

The first question is whether or not the earth is warming. If one compares the earth’s temperature of today with that of 30 years ago, then it is certainly warmer. If one compares the earth’s temperature of today with that of 10 years ago, the earth is cooler. Remember that Greenland was once green and that Wisconsin used to be under a mile of ice. Measuring a trend is only a picture of activity between two end points. The choice of those end points has an incredible impact on the direction of the trend, how dramatic it is, or whether it exists at all.

The second Global Warming question is if the earth is warming, why is it doing so? The science is fairly solid that human activity - specifically the belching forth of certain pollutants - can cause changes in our environment. No activity is devoid of consequences and it is reasonable to conclude that humans’ activities change our environment.

What has not been determined is how much of an impact human activity has. The global climate is affected by very powerful forces. For example, our sun has been in a cyclical active phase where it is emitting more energy. At the same time, global volcanic activity has been lower than usual. Thus at the same time that the sun is pumping more energy into our planet, there is less volcanic dust in the upper atmosphere to filter and reflect that energy.

Then there are the forces of El Nino and other forces that are still not completely understood. The effect of human activity on our global climate may be miniscule in comparison with forces completely out of our control. The alleged Global Warming impact of a century of human industrialization could be reversed by a single volcanic eruption.

This leads us to the third Global Warming question. If the earth is warming and human activity is contributing to it, can we do anything to reverse it? The answer to this question is rooted in the answer to question number two. If the earth is warming and 99.99 percent of the cause is because the sun is unusually active, then all of the Priuses and fluorescent bulbs in the world won’t stop the warming. That is not to say that we should not try to be as energy efficient as possible, but it might not do anything about Global Warming.

The fourth Global Warming question is, if the earth is warming because of human activity and we can stop it, then what should we do about it? Personally, I have always struggled with this question because I don’t know what the ideal global average temperature is. While a warmer earth might raise the sea levels a few inches and negatively impact our coastal cousins, it might also change millions of acres of frozen tundra in Russia, Canada, and elsewhere into farmable land. The opportunity to grow more food would make lives better for millions of starving people in the world. As I mentioned before, nothing is without consequences, but not every consequence of Global Warming is necessarily bad.

The other difficulty in answering this question is that many of the measures being advocated by Global Warming prophets have severe costs. For example, some people think the United States should sign the Kyoto Protocol even though the current signatories have been unable to adhere to it. The reason that the United States has not agreed to the protocol is that they project that it would be detrimental to the national economy. This means thousands of people without jobs, kids without health insurance, families losing their homes, and a lower standard of living for all. Is that cost worth it so that we might - I repeat "might" - prevent the earth’s temperature from rising an extra tenth of a degree? I certainly don’t think so.

The Global Warming apostles would like for people to not ask questions and blindly accept their solutions for our planet’s alleged problem. One should never trust people who don’t welcome questions.

(Owen B. Robinson, a West Bend resident, is a blogger who publishes at www.bootsandsabers.com. His column usually runs Tuesdays in the Daily News.)