As you can see from the other responses, frogs are amphibians, a different class than reptiles. Reptiles are able to lay their eggs (or in some cases, birth live young) out of the water, to which amphibians (their name means "double life") are restricted.
However, in an older sense (i.e., pre-Karl Lind), "reptile" was a general term for creeping things, including lizards, insects and lungfish. In that old sense, frogs are reptiles. Mammals, even those low to the ground, like weasels, were generally excluded.
Another reason why frogs are not reptiles is because a frog needs to spend atleast some time in water, and reptiles don't need to!
it is a Amphibian... A frog is an amphibian, not a reptile.
A frog is in the category of an amphibian. Not a reptile.
Turtle is to reptile as frog is to amphibian.
A tomato frog is an amphibian.
Oh, dude, a frog is not a reptile. It's actually an amphibian. Reptiles are like the cool, scaly dudes, and frogs are more like the party animals of the pond. So, yeah, frogs are definitely not in the reptile club.
amphimbian
no the Brazilian golden frog is an amphibian
The oldest reptile was a dinosaur. But now a frog is the oldest reptile.
it belongs to arthropoda/arthropod.
Your best bet to get a tree frog would be at a reptile show.
No, they are amphibians.
Reptile