I think you helped clarify why I am having so much trouble trying to get my work of six years or so on the global energy problem understood, and the reason why conventional science has never mathematcally signed energy in and out of use on Earth, positive when it is input from the sun therefore resulting in cooling (by nature using energy which would otherwise become heat), negative when taken back out by us (thereby converting a large part of it back to the heat it would have become if neither we nor nature had ever used it), they just want to keep things complicated, so they can make more money out of it, rather than just fix the problem.
Thanks for your thought provoking post!