//Toni Lavis, of course had to tell us, some time back, on another thread, that despite having a woman’s name, he is, in fact, male.//

Toni is actually one of those names applied to both males and females.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toni

In my case it's a hypocorism of Antonio, a name that my parents chose for me. Since there is no 'y' in Antonio, I see no sound reason to add an extraneous one when shortening my name.

Ant says”
LeoI believe Graham should delete your last comments about Toni". Yes, flea, my comments are true, and you have a pathological hatred of the truth, so you believe they should be deleted.No doubt you believe Toni's lies about me should be allowed to stand.
You are consistent, flea, always anti truth, and pro-lies.

Leo

You still have not provided any references to science, until you do I rest my case.
Your excessive aggression really says you protest too much; in other words you are not confident about your opinion. That fits into my comment made earlier about displaying psychological projection.

References please.

The flea says I have posted no science. I have posted this before, but the flea has "forgotten":”Carbon Dioxide hypothesis Fails
Robert Carter, a specialist in paleo-environmental and paleo-climatic topics and author of the book, “Climate: the Counter Consensus,” shows how this hypothesis of dangerous anthropogenic global warming (DAGW) fails. Below are some excerpts from a long post titled “Global Warming: Anthropogenic or Not?” See full post here.
Many different lines of evidence can be used to test the Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis (DAGW). Here are five pieces of evidence, all of which are based upon real world empirical data.
1. Over the last 16 years, global average temperature, as measured by both thermometers and satellite sensors, has displayed no statistically significant warming; over the same period, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 10%.
Large increases in carbon dioxide have therefore not only failed to produce dangerous warming, but failed to produce any warming at all. Hypothesis fails.
2. During the 20th century, a global warming of between 0.4̊C and 0.7̊C occurred, at a maximum rate, in the early decades of the century, of about 1.7̊C/century. In comparison, our best regional climate records show that over the last 10,000 years natural climate cycling has resulted in temperature highs up to at least 1̊C warmer than today, at rates of warming up to 2.5̊C/century.
In other words, both the rate and magnitude of 20th century warming falls well within the envelope of natural climate change. Hypothesis fails, twice.
3. If global temperature is controlled primarily by atmospheric car
So far, no evidence has been presented to disprove the null hypothesis.
https://wryheat.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/failure-of-the-anthropogenic-global-warming-hypothesis/

The flea says “You still have not provided any references to science, until you do I rest my case.
I have now posted, again, the science which shows the failure of any science upon which the flea relied.
I have requested, numerous times, that he refer me to any science which shows any measurable human effect on climate.
He has failed to reference any science. His fraud promotion is baseless, isn’t it, flea? He has no case to rest. Not a shred of science
Better than lying, isn’t it ,flea. You did not assert that you had a case, just referred to a non existent case, which you do not have. You are certainly dishonest.

//Yes, flea, my comments are true//

No they weren't.