frogs

I mean, frogs probably can't reason at that level---but if they could, that is how they would have to reason about it.

Not only are there differences in scale between frogs, worms and humans, there are also differences in complexity and structure.

It seems the excitability of headless frogs in varying temperatures was quite a point of interest, see eg p.393 ibid.

And any largish natural body of water got fresh-water fish and frogs introduced to it.

When zoologists label something 'frog' or 'mouse', they observe specific traits that differentiate the mice from frogs and group them into categories.

We are - all of us - the slowly boiling frogs of the story.

Often a few fish or frogs were the only thing standing in their way!

You don't need DDT or any poisons to get rid of mosquitoes, we used frogs and fish.

We may want to stop worrying about transpiling and pay closer attention to the skies, looking for raining frogs and or blood moons.

So we find out there's some creatures on Pluto that are roughly the same as frogs.

The apathy stems from the fact that the water is just fine for most citizens; the frogs who are subject to this abuse reside in a completely different pot than the one that most citizens enjoy.

I use something similar: tux instead of frogs and a personal fortunes file.

It is as if the part of the story about the frogs is meant to show that Nature has a "spirit" after all, that evaded being captured in logic.

That said Goltz experiment seems quite reasonable to me, ~"do frogs have non-brain based reflexes that react to temperature?", ~"do frogs react to absolute temperatures or just changes in temperature".

Your "invisible frogs" would not be a reformulation of Newtonian Mechanics (NM).

I could "very clever"-ly reformulate Newtonian physics as a series of invisible frogs who push things around by jumping into them.

Frogs can do this too (and more in fact), so I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.