What is Digg?170 Comments
- jburka, on 01/02/2008, -0/+59I'm not sure where The Telegraph got the headline, but the culprit is not a virus, but a fungus, specifically the amphibian chytrid fungus, as it states in the article. Still a killer, but not a virus.
- madsci, on 01/02/2008, -3/+36it's a fungus, not a virus.
- mugicha, on 01/02/2008, -2/+34It's not easy being green.
- twinklyJesus, on 01/02/2008, -1/+17Hopefully, mamals and not Mammals!
- ydt89, on 01/02/2008, -2/+15Noooo!!!!
*runs fresh oxygen lines in to frog cage*
*Seals cage*
Bwahaha. You shall never touch Mr.hoppers! - ButterBuddha, on 01/02/2008, -3/+16And I thought my wife's yeast infection was bad!
- Feep, on 01/02/2008, -2/+14Kermit? Is he...?
- had3l, on 01/02/2008, -2/+14We don't really have to keep our environment stable, its unnatural. The earth is a constantly evolving and changing organism. If aliens decided to avert the meteor hit that killed the dinosaurs in order to "prevent mass extinctions" we wouldn't be alive today. Species come and go, and we should learn to deal with that, its just the natural order of things... Eventually, nature finds a way to reach a point of balance.
- dbug, on 01/02/2008, -1/+12It's not even a virus. It's a fungus.
- geekchic, on 01/02/2008, -12/+23A reminder that nature can evolve a virus which targets whole sections of the planets ecosystem.
Mamals next? - joshuaer, on 01/02/2008, -2/+12Between roads, pollution and now this i can only wonder if one day frogs will only by in zoos.
- inactive, on 01/02/2008, -23/+33A wakeup call from nature, another good reason to be better care takers of our environment.
- weezcnr, on 01/02/2008, -0/+9"may have been made worse by the effects of global warming." Any one read that line and want the article to actually explain how?
- Telvin, on 01/02/2008, -6/+15one possible culprit for the mass extinction of frogs is us humans dwindling their genetic pool so the remaining few frogs that are left dont have some of the genes that would grant immunity to such a disease, such as what happened to humans with the bubonic plague. there were enough humans around at that time with genes that left them immune to the virus, so that the human species could survive the disaster. its not only happening with frogs, but with our oceans, whose populations are down to about 1 percent. out ecosystem is on the verge of collapse and its our goddamn fault.
- Frostman3D, on 01/02/2008, -10/+19Or it's "NATURAL SELECTION" telling those frogs to ***** off.
- inactive, on 01/02/2008, -3/+11"I can still fix this."
- Duilen, on 01/02/2008, -5/+13I imagine it is a lot easier to capture and isolate healthy frogs to save them from disease then it ever would be with humans.
- sdellboy, on 01/02/2008, -5/+13How will Miss. Piggy cope without Kermit? She'll be devastated.
- schnikies79, on 01/02/2008, -7/+15One possible culprit for the mass extinction of frogs is nature itself.
Not everything is human related, no matter what anyone believes. Nature can remove a species from the world faster than any amount of humans could. Nature could kill every single human overnight under the right conditions and there wouldn't be a damn thing we could do about it. Sorry but are species aren't the bad-asses we make them out to be. - noahhoward, on 01/02/2008, -9/+17Unless this is a human virus affecting the frogs then it is NOT a wakeup call from nature it is merely nature working as nature intends. I suppose there will be a whole ton of people trying to save to frogs because they're "important to the natural order".
The natural order has decided to kill the frogs, who are we to intervene? - captbbq, on 01/02/2008, -6/+14Stop personifying nature, it doesn't give a flying ***** about anyone or anything including you or the frogs. There is a "naturally" evolved virus killing off frogs, and if you want to save them you are actually working against nature. I'm not saying we can't/shouldn't save them, but just so long as you have your logic in order.
- threemagic, on 01/02/2008, -0/+7Hypno Toad
- hinchb, on 01/02/2008, -0/+7That crazy must keep you up at night.
- Urusai, on 01/02/2008, -1/+7Jesus hates frogs.
- deuceswilde, on 01/02/2008, -2/+8Frogs and similar animals have been around for a long time in one form or another. This is worrying but the assumption that none of these species will evolve to avoid extinction is pretty far-fetched.
- noahhoward, on 01/02/2008, -0/+6Why would you want to do that in the first place. Quit dicking with nature.
- kelly, on 01/02/2008, -0/+6As opposed to a partial extinction?
- madsci, on 01/02/2008, -0/+6"We propose that Africa is the origin of the amphibian chytrid and that the international trade in X. laevis that began in the mid-1930s was the means of dissemination."
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol10no12/03-0804.ht ... - whyufail, on 01/02/2008, -0/+5There is a difference between the natural ebb and flow of the environment, and an artificially introduced five mile high tidal wave which is what humanity is causing. We are very very intrusive on the natural way of things. With that kind of manipulation, you can't trust the delicate balances that ruled in the past anymore.
- steccou, on 01/02/2008, -0/+5I wonder if the writers realize that a fungus is not a virus.
- CerMakAlot, on 01/02/2008, -0/+5The only good bug is a dead bug!
- Elliuotatar, on 01/02/2008, -0/+5Actually it works exactly that way. Something kills off most of a species, the surviving members reproduce, and whatever trait allowed them to survive is passed on.
Of course there's the possiblity that no frogs will be immune to the virus. But that's still how evolution works. Survival of the fittest. - Railer, on 01/02/2008, -15/+20Um, one not our fault, two remember, when it was a hole in the ozone killing the frogs? What nature is telling us is: one humans don't control everything, and two things die.
If you want to stop two from happening, please see number one. - dbug, on 01/02/2008, -3/+8Once again, it's not a virus, it's a fungus. And the article clearly states global warming might have worsened the effect this fungus has on frogs and other amphibians.
Do you guys ever rtfa before you have to plaster your crap under the first posting of the thread? - markp93, on 01/02/2008, -0/+5wow. you went there, huh?
- noahhoward, on 01/02/2008, -2/+7Why the hell is this being buried. Humans are not involved in this at all. It is a fungus, just as any human virus or disease can mutate, this one has and frogs can't cope with it. It is nature. Stop trying to make every damned thing about us.
- prahareturns, on 01/02/2008, -2/+7This article is B.S. A fungus is not a virus. Chytrid fungi are an important part of the ecosystem and we are just beginning to learn more about the fungus at this time. The particular Chytrid fungus that is causing the death of amphibians is batrachochytrium dendrobatidis. I have yet to see any study that directly correlates global warming to this fungus.
Before you jump on an digg bandwagon and call for the eradication of Chytrids you may want to learn a little bit about what they are and how they fit into the ecosystem. - c0r3file, on 01/02/2008, -0/+5If I go around scaring people about every little thing can I make money too?
International Terrizts! Global Warming! Bird Flu! Bee Colony Collapse! Economic Recession! Are your kids in danger at school? Tune in tonight at 6pm to find out!
Pathetic... - JigsawX, on 01/02/2008, -0/+4Not yet....The Last time he was seen was at Miss piggys sisters House :)
- DefianceOhioFan, on 01/02/2008, -0/+4The frog in the pic just might be the coolest looking thing I've ever seen. Anybody know what type it is?
- dealseeker, on 01/02/2008, -0/+4Why yes, we all know that insurgent frogs are on every government's hitlist. There are far better ways to influence politics than killing frogs, and there are far better things to worry about (e.g. "Marburg virus", "Ebola") than viruses or fungi which target amphibians.
- dbug, on 01/02/2008, -0/+4Where has good journalism gone? I mean, don't they have a fact-checker or something? Sad.
- madsci, on 01/02/2008, -0/+4 The study of the chytrid and global warming."Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global warming" Nature. 2006 Jan 12;439(7073):161-7. Although there is some disagreement of this finding in a later researh article. Ecology: the proximate cause of frog declines? Nature. 2007 May 31;447(7144):E4-5; discussion E5-6.
- inactive, on 01/02/2008, -0/+3I saw that movie to!!!
- unpolloloco, on 01/02/2008, -5/+8just like he invented the internet???
- threemagic, on 01/02/2008, -1/+4The only virus I see is the dreaded didn't "RTFA" virus.
- oneoverzero, on 01/02/2008, -0/+3I too believe that Heroes is a prediction of future events.
- Santiak, on 01/02/2008, -1/+4The rate at which frogs are disappearing is by far higher than the natural rate of extinction.
Also to consider: this frogs belong to lineages that have survived for over 3 billion years. It is just coincidence that this wave of extinctions happens to occur at the same point of history when humans are consuming and degrading natural resources at an unprecedented rate?
Not very likely. - TheAkolyte, on 01/02/2008, -4/+7The environment doesn't care if we take care of it. It's not even self aware. Mandated and over-the-top preservation is just as selfish and stupid as excessive destruction.
- noahhoward, on 01/02/2008, -0/+3No, they're dying from a fungus.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 165 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is