Must we have someone point this out whenever someone says "boiling a frog"? The use of the phrase does not constitute an factual assertion about whether you can, in fact, boil a frog.
No, but people using it think it's a fact about frogs. Comparisons involving it contain an assumption/presupposition that's unknowingly false. Jesus employed facts about e.g. lilies in his parables; I doubt dodgy urban myths would have cut it. Please permit the people not so smart as you on the internet to learn someone without having to hear "Arghh I know that". But maybe you've read someone pointing out the frog myth 1000 more times than I! In which case I sympathize.
edit: Hehe I left HN after writing that to do something 'more useful', reading The Inmates are Running the Asylum. On about the 2nd page I read was:
"A frog that’s slipped into a pot of cold water never recognizes the deadly rising temperature as the stove heats the pot. Instead, the heat anesthetizes the frog’s senses. I was unaware, like the frog, of my cameras’ slow march from easy to hard to use as they slowly became computerized."
edit: Hehe I left HN after writing that to do something 'more useful', reading The Inmates are Running the Asylum. On about the 2nd page I read was:
"A frog that’s slipped into a pot of cold water never recognizes the deadly rising temperature as the stove heats the pot. Instead, the heat anesthetizes the frog’s senses. I was unaware, like the frog, of my cameras’ slow march from easy to hard to use as they slowly became computerized."