Evolution Enmeshed in a Spiders Web

"Eeeek! Dear, get a newspaper, or a shoe, or something quick! There's a big spider in the bathroom."
A familiar story, isn't it?
Almost as common to our environment as dirt, dust, ants and the common housefly is the spider. They seem to come in all shapes and sizes, and each stirs up grisly visions of horrible swellings, agonizing bites, ghastly, unknown consequences if one is bitten!
So — "squish!" another intruder into the household is quickly dispatched.
Spiders conjure up visions of terror to many a housewife. Recalling, perhaps, chilling scenes from science fiction movies when a gargantuan tarantula wobbled grotesquely over huge buildings, its tremendous fangs snapping up everything in sight, many timorous housewives attack spiders with all the ferocity of a charging rhinoceros — seemingly regarding the little beast as a challenge to life and limb.
Spiders and their webs have been used as symbols of evil for as long as anyone can remember. Want to design a book cover guaranteed to symbolize intrigue, mystery, a deep plot? Then draw a spider's web on it. Want to symbolize a trapped, hopeless feeling? Then show a man, enmeshed in that web.
Almost everyone has found himself snatching at the tenacious little cobwebs left behind by some enterprising spider who found the inside of a tool shed or barn a choice spot for trapping juicy green flies.
Unpleasant though the topic may be—spiders are very much a common part of our everyday environment. But where did they come from? How did a spider learn to spin a web? What ARE they, really? Are they really dangerous? Are they the friends, or the enemies of man? And did they EVOLVE?
You'll see, in this article, one big reason WHY the spider is the symbol of mystery and intrigue — especially to evolutionists! And you'll see the whole theory of their supposed evolution enmeshed in a complex, gummy, sticky web of impossible contradictions and confusion.

How Many Are There?
That one spider you found in your bathroom has many relatives. A leading authority on spiders (and many housewives would think, "Ugh! What a thing to be an 'authority' on"), W. S. Bristowe, calculates there are around two million, two hundred and sixty-five thousand spiders for every acre of undisturbed, grassy area! And, says another authority, the average number of spiders per acre in the grassy areas of England and Wales is not less than fifty thousand. For you people in England and Wales, that means a conservative total of TWO TRILLION, TWO HUNDRED BILLION spiders scurrying across your countryside.
Why England and Wales? Because the spider population of the United States would probably take more space than the remainder of this article to print!
It's no wonder, with so many of the evil looking little beasts about — that spiders have given rise to more legends and superstitions than almost any other living creature.
Spiders are not insects. Even though most people think they are. But then, most people pursuing a spider with a shoe are not worrying about their scientific classification. But spiders are members of the Arachnid family — which name, itself, comes from pagan superstition. It derives from the insane notion that Arachne, a girl of Lydia, who was famous as a weaver, challenged Athene, another nonexistent figment of ancient (and fertile) Greek imagination, to a contest. Arachne lost the contest, according to the fictitious story, and hanged herself. Whereupon Athene changed the noose into a cobweb, Arachne into a spider — and condemned her to weave forever. Greek children could then say, "Sure enough"  whenever watching a spider weave — and believe they had found evidence the story was true.
But superstitions — evolutionary or Greek — are not fact! And the spider family is one of the most important parts of the intricate balance in living things scientists like to call "nature."
Many scientists know insect control would be IMPOSSIBLE if spiders did not exist — that the world could enter a time of such insect plagues so as to defy imagination if the busy little arachnoids weren't munching their several billions of bugs for breakfast every day! And these helpful creatures rarely bite a human.

Amazing Variety
Spiders have some of the most UNUSUAL instincts and abilities of all living things.
There are spiders that are expert divers — and they take their OWN OXYGEN supply with them. Other spiders actually have ability to walk on the water!
Spiders can mimic dead fruit and twigs. They can CHANGE COLOURS to match the colour of flowers they reside in. Some can mimic dead wood or a piece of bark. One variety even is reported to make itself look like BIRD DUNG!
Spiders are among the world's best "quick change artists."
One group of spiders has long been noted for its engineering skill. By using block and tackle methods, it can hoist a much heavier victim into the air. Some spiders make their webs look like landing fields to trap unsuspecting insects.
Some spiders lasso their prey like cowboys. Others throw NETS over their victims like Roman gladiators. Some spit out a gummy ball tied to a thread and hit their victim in the head. They almost always succeed in "gumming up" their insect prey.
The male of one species of European spider presents the female with a wedding gift. Usually the gift is a fly suitably wrapped up for the occasion.
One spider, Misumenops nepenthicola has worked up a neat "deal" with an insect-trapping pitcher plant. (More of that later!) Some spiders actually build rafts to go sailing across the water. Spiders can also catch FISH! Other spiders are excellent carpenters—they can make perfect-fitting trapdoors.
These are only a few of the abilities that spiders have been endowed with. Could they all have EVOLVED — by themselves? Is it reasonable? But even MORE PHENOMENAL than all these instincts is the spiders' ability to spin webs!

Masterful Spinners
The English word "spider" is a corruption of a teutonic word, "spinder." It merely means "one who spins." We see the original root in such words as "spinster" and "spinstress."
And if spiders do anything, they certainly spin silk!
As any spiderling emerges from its egg sac, it spins a DRAGLINE. This dragline — attached to the spinnerets — strings behind it for all its life. The dragline serves the same purpose as the mountain climber's rope.
All kinds of spiders (except for a small group of the family Liphistiidae) at all ages maintain this dragline.
It prevents falls; it is used as a means of escaping enemies.
Spider silk comes in hundreds of varieties and weaves to serve a multitude of needs.
One thread might be used to fasten webs to a foundation. Another will be used to drop over a cliff. A third may be used to capture insect prey. As a recent issue of Reader's Digest brought out, "Webs of spiders are, in fact, their eyes, ears, voice and fingers" 
A spider without his ability to produce silk simply CANNOT SURVIVE.
One author admitted, "A vast multitude of sedentary spiders are strongly dependent on silk. Some of them have become SLAVES of elaborate webs and are nearly helpless when not in contact with them. For spiders of this type silk is of PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE during the whole lifespan" (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, page 53).

Spider Silk — Stronger Than Steel
A spider can spin a line of silk ONE-MILLIONTH of an inch in diameter! Yet, this single line has such elasticity that it can stretch one fifth of its length before breaking.
Its tensile strength is surpassed only by fused quartz fibers! It simply CANNOT BE DUPLICATED in the laboratory. Steel is WEAK by comparison.
Silk from spiders has been chemically analyzed. It is a very COMPLEX albuminoid protein. It is produced as a liquid in the many differing abdominal glands of the spider. As the spider draws out the liquids through the spinnerets, he mechanically stretches the material. Some scientists believe that this mechanical stretching hardens the silk into strands.
Most spider threads are made up of many fibers. To the naked eye, however, it doesn't appear to be so. Under ordinary magnification, single fibers appear to be uniform rods.
But when these are viewed under the electron microscope at 35,000 times the actual size, something VERY SURPRISING is seen. The threads are not completely uniform. Tiny irregularities and enlargements are clearly visible. But even at 35,000 diameters, the electron microscope has not been able to peer into these irregularities to see what other phenomenal things they reveal.
Spider silk, as mentioned, is breathtakingly fine.
One author mentioned in great amazement: "The finest single fibers attain a thinness of 0.03 micron, or about one-millionth of an inch .. . many molecules are LARGER than the width of these spider threads.
"It is possible that the spider can draw out its filaments to a degree equal to the thickness of its protein molecule, and that the finest threads represent A SINGLE CHAIN OF MOLECULES" (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, page 56).
Because of the quality of spider silk, it has been used for reticules in various optical instruments. Before World War I, spider silk was used for cross hairs and sighting marks in a wide variety of instruments.
Only with the advance of platinum filaments and engraving on glass plates has the use of spider silk in the industry decreased.

Did This All Evolve?
Of course, you are asked by scientists and evolutionists to believe that spiders DID EVOLVE.
No one would say steel or platinum wires evolved. No one in his right mind would claim the huge machines that produce steel or platinum gradually evolved by themselves. This would be sheer idiocy. We can clearly see it took many individuals using their MINDS to produce and construct these machines.
But when it comes to spider silk — which in most ways is SUPERIOR to either one — you are told, "Spiders EVOLVED the ability to spin silk!"
We are asked to believe that spiders evolved extremely complex silk-producing glands, spinnerets and a host of other organs used in forming silk.
But let's go a little further.
Not only do spiders spin silk, they also produce a fantastic array of SOUNDLY ENGINEERED webs. And as we have seen, spiders cannot exist apart from webs. At least, many varieties cannot.
But how did spiders learn to spin webs? Webs which overwhelm us with their variety; with their quality; with their unusual features.

Evolutionists' Approach
Now let's see how all this fantastic ability — this breathtaking array of life and intricacy — is explained by the "no-God FAITH" of evolution. But first, remember a few of the terms used by evolutionists in their attempts to keep a great Creator GOD out of the picture of His creation!
To an evolutionist, each life form is either SIMPLE, or COMPLEX, or somewhere in between. That is, a certain kind of life may be said to be MORE HIGHLY EVOLVED than another. To the average, unsuspecting student who simply SWALLOWS what his textbooks say — this kind of doubletalk "sounds" quite scientific.
But what do they MEAN, "simple"? or "less highly evolved"?
Is a gnat more SIMPLE than a giraffe, simply because it's smaller? Is one kind of fish, which swims more slowly, along the bottom, more SIMPLE than one which swims more rapidly, along the surface?
Aeronautical engineers know the jet engine to be truly SIMPLER than the piston types. Yet, it took MAN, with his combined knowledge and skills, his vastly superior intelligence, THOUSANDS of YEARS to DEVELOP (not evolve!) this "SIMPLER" form of engine! No, "simple" is not the word for ANY kind of life! Life itself, and all properties of living things are a far cry from SIMPLE.
But now, to the evolutionists' ideas about spiders.
The orb web is one of the most "intricate" webs spun by spiders. Here's what evolutionists say about it. "The orb web is the most highly evolved of all the space webs developed by sedentary spiders. It [listen to this language!] represents a triumph in engineering worthy of GREAT MECHANICAL INGENUITY AND LEARNING; it was arrived at by lowly spiders, which even by their most ardent supporters are credited with hardly a gleam of what is called intelligence.
"The ingredients of almost unlimited time, of moderate compulsion to irresistible change, and the stimulus of real advantages gained have contrived to produce the two-dimensional orb web ... instinctively and BLINDLY the spider has followed the long path leading to its symmetrical masterpiece" (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, page 2).
Whaaat?
Evolutionists admit that the web is a masterpiece of architectural and engineering ability! They admit that the spider doesn't have anything but instinct and lacks any constructive intelligence!
But then to go on to claim that the ingenious web could have evolved seems almost ludicrous. An idiot or moron COULD NEVER build a building such as the Merchandise Mart or Empire State. Neither could a spider learn by himself — given a HUNDRED BILLION YEARS — to produce a web.
This same author admits: "The orb web would seem to stand alone as a GLORIOUS CREATION, an incredible novelty designed by superior artisans"! (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, page 158.)
This author DOESN'T believe that spiders were created. Yet, he's had to admit they are a glorious creation. And that they are! Spiders are God's glorious creation. God was that superior artisan who designed the novelty of the spider web.

Proof From the Fossil Record?
Obviously, you can't SEE spiders evolving. The fact that such "dumb" creatures possess such marvellous abilities would seem to clearly show that something is wrong if you believe that all this skill evolved through blind CHANCE.
Yet, strangely enough, the "authorities" claim spiders, spider webs, the ability to spin silk, EVOLVED?
Is there proof in the fossil record — showing that spiders and webs evolved? Let's see.
"The evolution of the web, which is NOT PRESERVED in the fossil record, may be reconstructed from the behaviour of existing species.
"Originally the dragline PROBABLY served the single purpose of helping the wandering spider find its way back to its crevice ... but a further function MUST SOON HAVE evolved.
"After constant sallies and returns, the draglines formed a dense pattern radiating from the spider's shelter. Should a passing insect touch one of the lines, its vibrations would carry to the silken mat on which the spider rested, and the slight tremor underfoot would stimulate the spider to rush out and secure its prey.
"This proto-web, which EVEN TODAY is much more widely distributed than any other design, enabled the early spiders to flourish and diversify" (Scientific American, "Spider Webs," Theodore Savory, April, 1960).
Now, let's analyze that statement.
First, there's NO PROOF from the fossil record that spiders evolved the ability to spin and "improve" their webs.
Therefore, after that first statement EVERYTHING IS SPECULATION. If there is not proof from the past — and there certainly is none from the present — then it is mere unproven theory.

The First Web — Evolution Style!
The words "probably" and "must soon have" merely show that all is speculation.
The idea that the supposed history of the evolution of the web can be "reconstructed" from what we see around us is merely arguing by analogy. And any school boy learns that argument from analogy proves NOTHING unless it is backed up by proof.
Just because you see houses of various sizes and shapes doesn't mean one house EVOLVED into another. We can see this is sheer foolishness. Why can't evolutionists see that applying the idea of comparison to prove a point in web making is equally foolish?
Notice the author's last statement. This supposed "proto-web" is wide-spread today. If spiders with "proto-webs" can survive TODAY, why did others evolve what wasn't necessary in order to survive?
But if evolving new webs was necessary for survival, HOW have whole populations of spiders survived WITHOUT evolving more elaborate webs?

Theories, Theories — But No Proof!
Where did silk come from so that spiders could spin webs? Evolutionists don't know. They reason:
"Have you ever wondered how the phenomenon of silk use in spiders developed? Of course, WE DO NOT KNOW the entire story, but from the studies carried on by many observers, some parts of the TALE can be seen to fit into a pattern.
"Here is one clue to our reconstruction ... two THEORIES have been proposed for the evolution of silk ...it has been SUGGESTED... according to the second POINT OF VIEW . . . this theory SEEMS plausible."
On the evolution of the orb web, this author ends up saying, "The evolution of orb webs presents the GREATEST DIFFICULTY, and the question of HOW the elaborate method of constructing one was acquired by the ancestors of today's orb weavers is NOT EASY TO ANSWER" ("Evolution of the Web," B. J. Kaston, Natural History, April, 1966).
We agree.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to answer. Unless you can accept the truth that a Creator God was responsible for spiders.
But these aren't the only problems evolutionists must face.
If evolution were a fact, closely related species should SPIN SIMILAR webs. But it was found that all too often, the reverse was true. Closely related species were in the habit of spinning RADICALLY DIFFERENT webs. Out the window went the attempt to classify spiders by the type of web they wove.
The reverse is also a problem for evolutionists. Very different species of spiders SHOULDN'T SPIN similar types of webs, if they evolved. If they do, this poses a problem.
Because that means the exact series of very complicated steps that a spider goes through to spin his web would have to be DUPLICATED by another spider at another time.
This becomes rather embarrassing for evolutionists if it happens too often. It becomes rather difficult to explain how the impossible is so "common-place."
Yet, we see dissimilar spiders spinning SIMILAR webs.
The Cribellate uloborids spin a web that is almost an exact replica of the orb weavers. Yet, on the basis of classification, they must be placed FAR FROM the orb weavers.

An Embarrassing Experiment
E. Petrusewiczowa, a well-known arachnologist, performed a series of experiments that were rather embarrassing for evolution.
Here is the experiment as recorded in a Scientific American article entitled "Spider Webs," by Theodore Savory in April, 1960.
"Common cross-spiders were hatched in small boxes and kept there until they were partly grown, and then were transferred to large cages.
"They were IMMEDIATELY ABLE to spin perfect webs. In other words, they did not begin their careers by spinning primitive webs or webs of a type from which the full-blown orb web might later evolve.
"The fact that during their 'childhood' they had been fed by their keeper without any need for spinning had not affected their abilities."
The webs of spiderlings are in ALL ESSENTIALS like the webs of the mature spiders. The differences are in degree, not in kind, as the above-mentioned author had to admit.
It proves that spinning is INHERITED. It proves that spiders spin even if they DON'T NEED TO.
So there is absolutely NO PROOF that webs or spiders evolved. The fossil record doesn't show the evolution of the web. Experiments merely reinforce the truth. Spiders spin because they were made to spin. They can't help themselves.

A Multitude of Interesting Spiders
Unfortunately, there isn't room in this article to go into detail explaining the different webs and the complicated manner of their construction. But anyone interested shouldn't have too much difficulty finding a spider. It only takes thirty minutes to an hour to watch even an orb weaver complete her nest.
You'll be amazed as you watch the spider spin! As you watch, you'll be convinced that the theory of evolution doesn't have a dragline to hold on to.
But we're going to take a few of the MORE UNUSUAL varieties of spiders and show how ludicrous the theory of evolution is.
For example, there is the bolas spider that throws a ball of gummy "goo" attached to a dragline at an insect. He is almost always successful in lassoing an insect.
In effect, this is the bolas spider's web — simple as it is.
How did this evolve — or could it have?

Evolutionists admit they don't know!
"The fourth and final modification {of web making) is the . . . substitution of other techniques for obtaining prey.
"Perhaps the most remarkable of these is the bolas' throwing behaviour - "These spiders sit on, or suspend themselves from, a twig. They hold a thread, on the lower end of which is attached a sticky globule of silk, and FLING IT at passing insects. In Cladomelea the bolas is held by a hind leg and whirled rapidly in a horizontal plane. In the other two groups, the bolas is held by a front leg and is not whirled.
"Just how this behaviour evolved from ancestors that undoubtedly were orb weavers, I CANNOT GUESS"("Evolution of the Web," B. J. Kaston, Natural History, April, 1966).

Here is a spider that produces silk in huge amounts. Yet, evolutionists would have us believe that at some distant time the bolas spiders gave up their perfect web and based their survival ability on a blob of sticky silk dangling on the end of a short line.
Here is one attempted explanation of this angling habit.
"The habit of angling for prey must be a very old one, inasmuch as it is shared by spiders in such widely separated areas as Africa, Australia and America.
"Just when it arose and what inspired it belong at present only within the REALM OF SPECULATION ... the place or origin of this new method is tied up with the origin of the group itself, and of that WE KNOW NOTHING ... WE ARE INCLINED TO BE DOGMATIC IN OUR BELIEF that these spiders were once nearly typical orb-weavers but just how long ago this was we can ONLY SURMISE. It seems reasonable to suppose ..." ("Spiders that Lasso Their Prey," Willis Gertsch, Natural History, April, 1947).
Notice!
Evolutionists admit they are "inclined to be QUITE DOGMATIC!" That is — when they're talking about "evolution." But what do evolutionists say about the so-called "dogmatism" of theology?
They impugn it. They loudly decry any "dogmatic" assertions THERE IS A GOD!
But THEY wish to be free to say, over and over again, WE DON'T KNOW— WE GUESS — WE MAY ASSUME — WE SUPPOSE — PERHAPS — COULD BE — MAYBE, and THEN, after admitting they KNOW NOTHING of "HOW" a certain thing "evolved" turn right around and say, "WE ARE INCLINED TO BE DOGMATIC!"
Sounds like evolution has trapped itself in its own web.

Spitters and Net Throwers
The spitting spider, Scytodes thoracica — a yellowish spider with small black spots — can be found in the northern United States.
When a spitting spider sees a likely meal, its body shakes convulsively. Then, suddenly it squirts a sticky gum — usually at a distance of a quarter to half an inch — and ZAT!
Another insect has become a spider meal.
Then, there's Menneus, the net throwing spider. This unusual spider has a unique way of finding its food. A description by an on-the-spot observer is quoted in ,American Spiders by Willis Gertsch, pages 148-149.
"Menneus suddenly stretches the elastic snare to its full expansion, which appears to be five or six times its size when closed, and hurls herself forward, THROWING THE NET OVER the moth and closing it down upon it with her four front legs. The moth is helpless and the spider at once bites it.
"After waiting a few moments, she carefully extracts it from the web and the insect does not move, probably because of the paralyzing effect of the poison injected at the bite."
This spider-sized Roman gladiator gums up the theory of evolution.

The Spider and the Pitcher Plant
The Malayan spider, Misumenops nepenthicola has a most unusual home. It lives in the inside of an insect-eating plant.
The pitcher plant provides a source of refuge and an abundant food supply for the spider. It is doubtful if the spider produces anything for the plant. This pitcher plant is DESIGNED to lure insects into its death trap. At the upper edge, there is a most enticing nectar. Insects converge on this flower-collared area.
But suddenly the insects slip. Because right below it is a most slippery wax. The curious insects lose their footing — and DOWN they go! They tumble into the interior of the plant; smack into a gastric juice that dissolves insects into edible food for the plant.
Here lurks that nepenthicola.
He thrashes around the undigested exoskeletons of doomed insects. But the spider CAN'T be harmed! Nepenthicola has an "antibiotic" — a counter enzyme that neutralizes the pitcher plant enzyme.
This spider can even submerge himself in the liquid for short periods of time. How does it survive? Its breathing holes are special hairs that trap a film of air.
"Thanks to this property, this dangerous abode becomes the SAFEST PLACE in the world for its occupants, indeed a land of milk and honey, in which other insects, defenceless and half predigested, are supplied direct to their chewing jaws.
"In this way the carnivorous plant is defrauded by its 'sub-tenants,' and WITHOUT RETURN OF PRODUCTIVE SUBSTANCES useful to its own growth and flower formation" (Mysterious Senses of Animals, Vitus Droscher, page 56-57).
Ah, the pitcher plant receives no return for its investment! This is CONTRARY TO the "struggle for survival." How did the plant KNOW that the spider wouldn't destroy it?
Here is a plant existing for the good of the spider.
Now, how many MILLIONS of years went by before the spiders developed an "anti-enzyme." Of course, they all died before they discovered this secret! But they're with us today!
Here is another one of those PARADOXES which evolution simply cannot explain on the basis of slow, agonizing change over millions of years!
The spider had to be created AS HE IS — to immediately withstand the pitcher plant enzyme.

Fishing Without a Pole
Some Pisaurids are skilful fishing spiders. Although these are not the true "water spiders" (which we'll mention shortly), their specialized hairs allow them to walk on water — and also to propel themselves forward. The hairs serve both as ballast and oars.
These spiders can remain UNDER the surface of the water for long periods. Some have been known to submerge for as long as 45 minutes.
How did they do this?
They have tiny body hairs that capture bubbles of air. As the bubbles cover their respiratory orifices, they obtain the oxygen they need.
Whenever these spiders see a struggling insect, they skate out over the water in hot pursuit. Although these spiders generally "fish" only for insects, they don't reject fish. They have been seen feeding on small fish and tadpoles.
As long as size permits, they will eat a variety — insect or fish!
Owners of balanced aquaria have scratched their heads more than once wondering what happened to some prize fish.
An observer gave an actual account of a spider catching a fish:
"That night about 11 o'clock, when I had finished my day's work, I sat down by the aquarium to watch the spider, with the hope that I might see how the fisherman caught his fish.
"The spider had taken up a position on a piece of stone, where the water was not deep, and had thrown out its long legs over the water.
"After watching for some little time, I saw a small fish swim towards the stone and pass under the outstretched legs of the spider. The spider made a swift and sudden plunge.
"Its long legs, head, and body went entirely under water, and the legs were thrown around the fish with wonderful rapidity, and in a moment the powerful fangs were piercing the body of the fish.
"The spider at once brought its catch to the rocks, and began without delay to eat it" (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, pages 209-210).

Another spider, Dolomedes fimbriatus has a slightly different technique.
Dolomedes lives in the marshy areas of England. He sews several leaves together into a RAFT! He drags the mass into the water, jumps into the spider-made canoe and — with wind in his hair — sails the seven streams.
As he sails over the water, he keeps a sharp eye peeled for insects. As he sallies to and fro, he invariably comes upon a potential meal. Then, SUDDENLY — Dolomedes springs out of the raft and darts across the water.
Another insect has met its doom!
It's rather humorous! But not so funny for evolutionists. After all, why go to such GREAT TROUBLE to get food? Why struggle for millions of years to come up with the raft idea, when other spiders — content to stay on land — have ALWAYS HAD full stomachs?
Why chance drowning because your hairs aren't developed enough to give you enough buoyancy, to function as paddles and as a portable aqualung? All fisher spiders must surely have DIED before they learned all these complex tricks. But we still have them.
Again, evolution doesn't have the answer to these SPECIFIC spiders and their humorous antics. But these details reveal that God has a sense of humour. Man has a small measure of mind — the same type of THINKING mind as God does. Man builds rafts, oars, aqua-lungs!
But God took great pleasure in making such creatures that do — by instinct — almost HUMAN actions! These "brainless" spiders had aqualungs thousands of years before man with his intellect invented them. Spiders reveal the humour and balanced mind of GOD.

Walking Under Water
Argyroneta, lives entirely in the water — but still NEEDS AIR to keep her alive!
Argyroneta lays down a platform of silk. She bridges the web carefully to surrounding plants.
This platform must be so masterfully constructed that NO AIR will escape from underneath it.
Now comes step two.
"This framework finished, Argyroneta swims to the surface for air to provision her unique home. She raises her abdomen and hind legs well above the water, securing a large supply, then submerges ...
"She paddles underneath the sheet and releases the air, which PUSHES UPWARD and billows the silk into a small air sac. After many trips to the surface, the silk has been blown into a MINIATURE DIVING BELL, open below, which from the outside appears as a silvery drop in the water" (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, page 215).
As the need arises, Argyroneta will bring additional air to the diving bell. The spider spends much of its life around this diving bell. Eating and courting take place in the diving bell. The eggs mature and hatch within this silk-lined, air-filled home.
Argyroneta is an expert swimmer under the water. But even though, theoretically, she could stay submerged for sixteen hours, she is TOTALLY DEPENDENT on her tiny diving bell.
Could all this have evolved? What are evolutionists asking of blind chance? Why build an elaborate diving bell in a medium where you would find it hard to survive? Here those landlubber spiders are putting away the insects and that poor water spider population has been drowning for millions of years — desperately trying to develop a diving bell!
Either the strands don't hold the air; the eggs become waterlogged; the hairs on the legs don't hold air; Argyroneta hasn't learned to swim yet! A thousand things go wrong for MILLIONS OF years.
Finally, after millions of generations — a few Argyroneta survive! Evolutionists say they can. But theirs is blind faith!

Inventing the Block and Tackle
Theridion tepidariorum, a common spider found in the United States, is known for his engineering skill. And it's a skill in a particular direction. Theridion uses the block-and-tackle method to lift objects of great size.
Some of these spiders are credited with lifting small snakes and mice.
One observer reported this shocking feat.
"Against the wall of the room stands a tolerably tall desk, and under this was a small spider, not larger than a common pea, who had constructed an extensive web reaching to the floor.
"The spider had snared a young mouse by passing filaments of her web around its tail. When first seen the mouse had its forefeet on the floor and could barely touch the floor with its hind feet.
"The spider was full of business, running up and down the line and occasionally biting the mouse's tail, making it struggle desperately.
"Its efforts to escape were all unavailing, as the slender filaments about its tail were too strong for it to break. In a short time it was seen that the spider was SLOWLY HOISTING ITS VICTIM into the air.
"By two o'clock in the afternoon the mouse could barely touch the floor with its forefeet; by dark the point of its nose was an inch above the floor. At nine o'clock at night the mouse was still alive, but made no sign except when the spider descended and bit its tail. At this time it was an inch and a half from the floor.
"Yesterday morning the mouse was dead, and hung THREE INCHES from the floor" (American Spiders, Willis Gertsch, page 165).
Again, we ask the question, "Why evolve such a laborious method of getting your meal?" It would be a whole lot easier to come DOWN to the meal instead of RAISING it to you.
Besides, spiders are supposed to be dumb. So how could they evolve such matchless engineering perfection?
And the questions are endless. We have only been able to ask a few of them in this article. The abilities of spiders are so myriad BOOKS would be necessary to explain them all.
Evolutionists have no answers for these questions! They are left HELPLESS to account for spiders in their theories. And, shocking as it may sound, many evolutionists claim spiders "appeared on the scene" long BEFORE INSECTS — their chief means of FOOD! The most liberal "admit" their theory requires only "comparatively few" insects at the supposed "time" the "earliest" spiders "appeared." But this is IMPOSSIBLE!
How did they survive all those thousands — no, MILLIONS of years, WITHOUT ANY INSECTS — or with only a FEW insects among all those TRILLIONS upon TRILLIONS of voracious spiders?
It's about time You began to ADMIT — whether stubborn, God-rejecting evolutionists will or not — that YOUR GOD EXISTS! It's about time you saw His loving handiwork all around you; observed His marvellous MIND at work, in the intricate design and colourful harmony in nature. WATCH a spider in her web. Watch her weave — watch her skate on water — or swim beneath it. Watch her float through the air; buoyed up by a strand of super-fine silk. Watch the marvels of creation all about you, and grow to know more about the great, all-knowing, FATHOMLESS MIND OF GOD who created all these thing

Home | Email