Is it real??

[Surroundx]

That's definitely a Photoshop job. Enlarge the pic and just look where the guy is holding the frogs legs. You can also see that the frog itself does not belong in the original image. The largest cane toad (Bufo marinus) ever, according to Wikipedia (though no source is given) was 38cm SVL and 2.65kg (5.8lb). The frog in the photo has a SVL almost exactly 4 fist-widths of the man in the picture. Assuming that man's fists are a little less than 10cm wide (which is quite reasonable), then the frog in the picture would also be c.38cm SVL. So assuming that the largest cane toad was indeed 38cm SVL (or bigger), then a frog of such size is possible.​

 

[ssnakeboyy]

That's definitely a Photoshop job. Enlarge the pic and just look where the guy is holding the frogs legs. You can also see that the frog itself does not belong in the original image. The largest cane toad (Bufo marinus) ever, according to Wikipedia (though no source is given) was 38cm SVL and 2.65kg (5.8lb). The frog in the photo has a SVL almost exactly 4 fist-widths of the man in the picture. Assuming that man's fists are a little less than 10cm wide (which is quite reasonable), then the frog in the picture would also be c.38cm SVL. So assuming that the largest cane toad was indeed 38cm SVL (or bigger), then a frog of such size is possible.​

ummm not a frog... toad
hahahaha couldn't help it lol

 

[Surroundx]

Etymologically frog simply means "without tail", so toads qualify as frogs on this account.

Bufonidae are indeed the "true" toads, as opposed to the many types of frogs only commonly referred to as toads. But as Bufonidae are anurans (Order: Anura), toads are simply a subset of frogs which have evolved unique morphological characteristics. Hence I was referring to them in the more general sense of the word, as opposed to the strict taxonomic sense.