Have some closet ID scientists managed to infiltrate the hallowed halls of the Royal Society of London? Perhaps they have:
Duncan R.P., Autumn, K., Binford, G.J. (2007) Convergent setal morphology in sand-covering spiders suggests a design principle for particle capture. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 274: 3049-3056. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2007.1039.
I have not been able to read the paper, but from the abstract, they found that two “distantly related” spiders had both found the same solution to the problem of covering themselves in sand: they have small hairs on their small hairs that trap the sand.
Of course, the scientists are careful to cover their tracks by talking “evolutionary origins”, but it is obvious that they are thinking about biology from a design perspective. It is a shame that they have to hide this behind a Darwinian facade in order to get published.
There might be more to this story. We have two spiders that have the same solution to the same problem, and the will Darwinist claim that this is convergent evolution, when surely common design is a simpler explanation. But this about this. Developing new, finer hairs that stick to sand cannot be easy, and what use is a hair that is too thick? Could a thick, purposeless, hair have evolved first? I predict that when ID scientists look at this more carefully, they will find irreducible complexity in the sandy hair on a spider’s back.