Spider Web Construction

Bob Crowley · Mar 31, 2025

There is a fairly large spider web spanning the gap from our patio roof to a fence and garden nearby. I haven't measured it but I would guesstimate it's about 3 metres at the widest point including the anchoring strands.

I haven't got the heart to take it down and it is not in our way being above our heads for the most part.

As I stood looking at it I wondered how the spider managed to reach the guttering on the patio to hold one end of a long thead. So I went looking for an explanation.

Wikipedia had the following - Spider web - Wikipedia

Many webs span gaps between objects which the spider could not cross by crawling. This is done by first producing a fine adhesive thread to drift on a faint breeze across a gap. When it sticks to a surface at the far end, the spider feels the change in the vibration. The spider reels in and tightens the first strand, then carefully walks along it and strengthens it with a second thread. This process is repeated until the thread is strong enough to support the rest of the web.[14]

After strengthening the first thread, the spider continues to make a Y-shaped netting. The first three radials of the web are now constructed. More radials are added, making sure that the distance between each radial and the next is small enough to cross. This means that the number of radials in a web directly depends on the size of the spider plus the size of the web. It is common for a web to be about 20 times the size of the spider building it.[15]

After the radials are complete, the spider fortifies the center of the web with about five circular threads. It makes a spiral of non-sticky, widely spaced threads to enable it to move easily around its own web during construction, working from the inside outward. Then, beginning from the outside and moving inward, the spider methodically replaces this spiral with a more closely spaced one made of adhesive threads. It uses the initial radiating lines as well as the non-sticky spirals as guide lines. The spaces between each spiral and the next are directly proportional to the distance from the tip of its back legs to its spinners. This is one way the spider uses its own body as a measuring/spacing device. While the sticky spirals are formed, the non-adhesive spirals are removed as there is no need for them any more.

Who taught the spiders to build webs and why would they even have bothered to begin with?

Not only that but their jaws are designed to make it easy to cut silk strands when they need to -

Spiders use physics, not chemistry, to cut silk in their webs – Physics World

New work resolves a longstanding debate and could aid the development of new cutting tools

physicsworld.com

In spider fangs, however, the serrations are not evenly spaced. Instead, Pugno and Greco found that the gap between them is narrowest at the tip of a fang and widest nearest the base. This, they say, suggests that when spiders want to cut a fibre, their fangs slide inwards across it until it becomes trapped in a serration of the same size. At the contact point between fibre and serration, the required cutting force is at a minimum, thereby maximizing the efficiency of cutting.

“We conducted specific experiments to prove that the fang of a spider is a ‘smart’ tool with graded serrations for cutting fibres of different dimensions naturally placed in the best place for maximizing cutting efficiency,” Pugno explains. “This makes it more efficient than a razor blade to cut these fibres,” Greco adds.

Convenient outcome for blind unguided chance isn't it? And why would senseless chemicals even begin to form life without a motive?

Warden_of_the_Storm · Mar 31, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
Who taught the spiders to build webs and why would they even have bothered to begin with?

Well, in the Greek myths, it's all because of a weaver called Arachne who got very prideful in her abilities by boasting that she was better than Athena, the goddess of wisdom, and thus she was transformed into a spider. Hence why spiders can span webs over long distances with intricate patterns and skill.

HOWEVER, to say that they do so with 'skill' and form 'intricate patterns' is very much applying post hoc human logic to such things, as is the very loaded question "Who taught the spider?". It's bad logic, since you're starting with a conclusion and working backwards.

Now, we can take one of three paths with this;

1) God created the spider's ability to create webs.

2) Spiders evolved from basal organisms that used silk stands to aid in catching prey and this then evolved into larger and strong webs that allowed them to catch prey more easily.

And 3) God created the spider's ability to create webs by having them evolve from basal organisms that used silk stands to aid in catching prey and this then evolved into larger and strong webs that allowed them to catch prey more easily.

Bob Crowley · Mar 31, 2025

First they had to develop silk strands. Then they had to figure out how to design the web. They had to develop jaws that could cut through the web with more finesse than a razor blade. They had to figure out they needed to send out a sticky thread to catch hold of an anchor point, but also develop non sticky threads to finish the job.

Did the humans who designed the bridges based on spider web design do so by trial and error or did they think about it in advance.

I find it a lot easier to believe there's an intelligent designer at work. Those bridges didn't build themselves, and the engineers didn't learn by trial and error.

We're keen to take the credit for our designs, but God must be kept out of the picture at all costs if nature shows evidence of remarkable design.

It's part of our rebellion against God.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Mar 31, 2025

But God is only 'kept out of the picture' because there is no way to scientifically test for God, no way to include Him in anything scientific. And plus, adding God in opens up the way to adding in all other deities across the world into the fray which really would make it a huge mess.

Yes, trial and error is the biggest thing behind any design, and just because something works for the spider on the micro scale does not mean that it would work for humans on the macros scale requiring the addition of a whole host of other factors that spiders don't need to deal with.

Your argument makes precisely zero sense.

River Jordan · Mar 31, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
First they had to develop silk strands. Then they had to figure out how to design the web. They had to develop jaws that could cut through the web with more finesse than a razor blade. They had to figure out they needed to send out a sticky thread to catch hold of an anchor point, but also develop non sticky threads to finish the job.

Don't assume the process went from no webs at all straight to complex web-building. There's a lot of diversity even in how spiders use silk for example (not all use it for catching prey).

Those bridges didn't build themselves, and the engineers didn't learn by trial and error.

Actually there has been a fair bit of trial and error in the history of human bridge-building.

We're keen to take the credit for our designs, but God must be kept out of the picture at all costs if nature shows evidence of remarkable design.

It's part of our rebellion against God.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. If people want to believe God specifically designed spiders to make silk and spin webs, no one is stopping them.

Hans Blaster · Mar 31, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
We're keen to take the credit for our designs, but God must be kept out of the picture at all costs if nature shows evidence of remarkable design.

Science doesn't invoke gods or other supernatural forces. Most of the claimed "design" in nature clearly isn't "design" when examined more closely.

Bob Crowley said:
It's part of our rebellion against God.

One can not rebel against what they do not think exists.

Like many Christians, I had no problems with evolved spiders as part of nature.

SelfSim · Mar 31, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
I find it a lot easier to believe ..

Yes ..
Who said life was meant to be easy?

AV1611VET · Mar 31, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
Did the humans who designed the bridges based on spider web design do so by trial and error or did they think about it in advance.

Good question.

Biomimicry

Bob Crowley · Mar 31, 2025

It also appears spiders have special coating on the tips of their legs so they don't stick to their own webs. This means they coincidentally had to develop silk and a lot of it; coincidentally developing the strongest known substance for tensile strength; sticky and non-sticky silk; figure out how to interpret vibrations on the web; work out how to cast a sticky strand to a nearby object; develop non-stick coatings on the tips of their legs; and efficent jaws which can cut this strong structural silk with more finesse than a razor blade.

They need to have all the parts working to do what they need to do. A pile of silk in an internal organ is useless by itself.

I'll stick to the designer theorem.

https://www.sciencefocus.com/nature/why-dont-spiders-get-caught-in-their-own-web

Why don’t spiders get caught in their own web?
Asked by: Regan Cook, via Twitter

... Spiders only put glue droplets on some of their strands of silk, and they tend to avoid these as they move around their web. Spiders also only touch the web with the tips of their feet (‘tarsi’), which have a non-stick coating.

In addition, a special claw on the end of each foot grips the web and pulls it against springy hairs. When the claw is released, the springy hairs push the web strand away, stopping it from sticking.

SelfSim · Mar 31, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
.. I'll stick to the designer theorem.

Its a theorem now, is it?
Lol! Hilarious!

Bob Crowley · Mar 31, 2025

I'll give God credit where credit is due.

You can shove your arrogance.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Apr 1, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
I'll give God credit where credit is due.

You can shove your arrogance.

Using the reply button would be good.

But no, selfsim is right. Claiming a designer is not a theory or theorem. It's a religious belief, simple as.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Apr 1, 2025

AV1611VET said:
Good question.

Biomimicry

The claim for biomimicry for bridges gets a bit weird when suspension bridges are simply a much more technologically complicated version of rope bridges.

I highly doubt that a human had a spider in mind when they thought "Hmm... this gap is a bit too long for me to jump... but if I get some long pieces of rope, I can use them to get across."

Warden_of_the_Storm · Apr 1, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
It also appears spiders have special coating on the tips of their legs so they don't stick to their own webs. This means they coincidentally had to develop silk and a lot of it; coincidentally developing the strongest known substance for tensile strength; sticky and non-sticky silk; figure out how to interpret vibrations on the web; work out how to cast a sticky strand to a nearby object; develop non-stick coatings on the tips of their legs; and efficent jaws which can cut this strong structural silk with more finesse than a razor blade.

They need to have all the parts working to do what they need to do. A pile of silk in an internal organ is useless by itself.

I'll stick to the designer theorem.

https://www.sciencefocus.com/nature/why-dont-spiders-get-caught-in-their-own-web

All this commentary shows is that you don't know a thing about how biological evolution works and you also have no desire to learn.

Being proud of your ignorance is also arrogance.

Bob Crowley · Apr 1, 2025

More trial and error I suppose - layers of nanofibres parallel to the axis, other nanofibrils coiling like a spiral staircase... containing nanoncyrstals .. which contain electrical charges to stop the chains from slipping.

Gods webspinners give chemists free lessons-Creation Magazine (spider silk)

Spiderwebs stronger than Kevlar.

creation.com

Spider silk owes its amazing strength and elasticity to its ‘complexity that makes synthetic fibres seem crude.’1 Man-made fibres are usually just simple strands of material, but a silk fibre has a core surrounded by concentric layers of nanofibrils (tiny threads). Some layers contain nanofibrils aligned parallel to the axis, while other layers contain nanofibrils coiling like a spiral staircase. The coiled ones allow the silk to be stretched, because they simply straighten up rather than break.

The nanofibrils themselves are very complicated, containing tiny protein crystals in an amorphous (shapeless) matrix of tangled protein chains. These nanocrystals contain electrical charges that stop the chains from slipping, so providing strength, while the amorphous material is rubbery and allows the fibre to stretch.

Apparently the spider's biology figured this out by trial and error, resulting in a complex fibre that has more strength than Kevlar, using commonly available biological agents to make it, like beatutiful roses from the glory of mud, unlike Kevlar which uses very toxic processes to form.

When you can even begin to show me the method of trial and error the spider used to develop this fibrous materials then I'll think the amorophous catch cry of "Evolution" is the answer to all the complexity of biological life.

Plus the fact nearly every biological reaction requires an enzyme, which are biological catacylsts. No enzymes - no biological reactions.

How did they develop without biological reactions to develop them?

SelfSim · Apr 1, 2025

Bob Crowley said:
Plus the fact nearly every biological reaction requires an enzyme, which are biological catacylsts. No enzymes - no biological reactions.

How did they develop without biological reactions to develop them?

Try autocatalysis and complexification of prebiotics .. or is that also arrogance?
(Hint: No .. its embedded causality modelled using information theory .. ie: Abiogenesis).

Warden_of_the_Storm · Apr 1, 2025

Even if we did show you this method of trial and error, whatever that means to you, would you even acknowledge it as evidence?

SelfSim · Apr 1, 2025

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
Even if we did show you this method of trial and error, whatever that means to you, would you even acknowledge it as evidence?

No .. we already have the answer .. 'Oh .. its just easier to believe in something else ..'

Warden_of_the_Storm · Apr 1, 2025

SelfSim said:
No .. we already have the answer .. 'Oh .. its just easier to believe in something else ..'

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt to answering.

Apple Sky · Apr 1, 2025

When we study God's creation i.e insects etc God gives us the mind for future inventions e.g Birds gave us flight like biology gave us cures for many diseases.

Spider Web Construction

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Hood was a loser.

A non "-ist"

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

A non "-ist"

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

A non "-ist"

Well-Known Member

A non "-ist"

Well-Known Member

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency