Hunt for murderer of lost golden cloud toads hots up

No, No, No.

Wasn't the environmental catastrophe of the 80s asbestos or CFCs or Acid Rain or leaded petrol or something?

Carbon _DIOXIDE_ (don't forget the dioxide!) was barely thought of back then (at least in the wider public consciousness), so it wasn't in the papers, so it couldn't have been an issue.

Too many humans

Global warming? pft...Too many people. Finite space and resources being eaten up by endlessly multiplying people. Habitat loss. Don't send aid ever, send condoms. The meek shall inherit the earth, or what is left. More creatures in danger, cause greedy humans. Extinctions happen regularly, no one cares. People detached from nature. Prognosis for future..not good. GM crops, not feed poor, feed greedy mercans bank accounts. Create monocultures. Hide little toad, hide.

What's all this then?

"warming alarmists", "warmist tendency", "warmist researchers"...

Your articles on climate change used to be more balanced than this. Have you been hanging out with Andrew Orlowski of late, or is this evidence of a hardening of El Reg's editorial stance?

So we did kill them.

The *introduced* fungus killed them. Regardless of whether climate change caused them to gather, the INTRODUCED fungus killed them!

Get that?! They died because we messed with their ecosystem however you want to cut, dice or spin it.

And also, if their ecosystem was not a tiny island due to human encroachment and clearance of their habitat then neither the fungus nor climate change might have been a worry. As it is, one or other, or both was permanently fatal.

To suggest humanity played no role in the demise of this creature is like saying humanity cannot change climate! We managed to increase UV radiation by eating a hole in the ozone layer. Then we managed to stop further development of that problem, so that is two examples in one of humans altering the conditions under which life evolved and flourished. If you alter a LOCAL system, quid pro quo, as that system is part of the global system, you are altering the global system. Just as a GMC car having no power steering means whilst it is still a car, it does not function the same as it did....

No shit Sherlock!

".....climate change will no doubt play a role in future extinctions,”

A safe bet that as it's played a massive role in a large number of the previous ones. Most of these rather inconveniently occurred before there were any people around to blame for it though.

waste of carbon

the whole study, all of the debate.. anybody care to hazard the footprint this argument has created?

and these people are being paid to continue the debacle.

poor bloody frogs yes..

we did it however indirectly.. it's not like we're not in the anthropocean(?) era or anything..

@Gianni Straniero:

"Balance" is only a requirement where there are multiple opposing views of broadly equal value and merit.

The recent Climategate (and other) scandals have effectively undermined the panic-mongers' key points. "Man-Made Climate Change" is being pimped by vested interests in exactly the same way malware's potential damage is often hyped to the skies by anti-malware companies. And only the latter have any evidence that could be described—if you squint a little—as "compelling".

The Earth is in exactly zero danger from Homo Sapiens. *We* might be some *slight* danger, but we're an adaptable species; we've survived ice ages and more.

And the ecosystem has been looking after itself just fine for millions of years. Extinctions have happened before—even mass extinctions—and new species evolve to fill any new niches.

(Note: "Natural Climate Change" also exists. Feel free to explain how we're supposed to stop it. And why we should even do so.)

@ Sean Timarco Baggaley

Furthermore, we expect to get the alternate, non-mainstream viewpoint from The Reg. If you don't wanna see the other side of the coin, go read BBC etc. with the rest of the sheeple.