If you listen to scientists and behavioural psychologists they will say that the reason that men and women find each other attractive are due to biological and physical traits that suggest suitability for procreation and a desire to pass on our genes.

The desire to have sex with a certain person stems from the desire to pass on our genes to the next generation.  Or to put it another way, the desire to pass on our genes is the first cause of the reason we want to have sex.

How then can they explain that in a single generation or two (very literally zero in evolutionary time) the desire to have children has dropped off almost completely?  Birth-rates are not even at replacement for the first time in history and yet the obsession with sex is greater than ever.  The cause appears to have been completely removed from society and yet the result has not.

There are now a number of people who don't want to have any children in order to save the planet (for the trees and other people's children).  They appear to have easily suppressed the desire to pass on their genes in a single generation.

It needs a biological desire.  And one desire stems from the other.  One causes the other.  Cause/effect.

Do people have babies because they primarily want to have sex ?

or

Do people have sex because they primarily want to have babies ?

---

It seems OBVIOUS from observing human behaviour that the first statement is true.  Which implies a creator or designer put it there.  Then told us "be fruitful and multiply".  We can disobey the creator because of our free will but we cannot very easily overcome the desire to have sex, (only resist it which is very difficult) because that is the cause and hard wired into our biology.

Evolutionists tell us both these desires are hardwired into our DNA but that the cause is the biological imperative for procreation and the effect is sɛҳuąƖ desire to reach that goal.  But this suggests these biological desires would both take eons to change if they ever changes.  Yet one has fallen off a cliff and the other has increased.

The end (passing your genes on through babies) has been dropped in a 40-100 year period and the means (sɛҳuąƖ intercourse) is more focused on that ever.  I can't see how evolution accounts for this.

So in that case the cause is a desire to have sex, not the desire or biological imperative to reproduce.

If you read the evolutionists writings they seem to suggest the opposite.  That human attractiveness is caused by a desire to pass on their genes and sex is the mechanism to do that, but procreation (the end) causes sex (the means) to be desirable (at a biological level).

Is there any evidence that simple organisms "enjoy" sex.  Do they get any reward from it by nature in terms of chemical or hormone boost?

And what of sexless reproduction?  Every living thing reproduces, but not everything mates.

I know it is nonsense, but I am raising the question to demonstrate this.

The human population expanded for all of history.  People had children and many of them died so growth was slow.  There were famines, epidemics etc.

With mechanisation, medicine, and huge improvements in agricultural yield and less childhood mortality population numbers grew and grew and grew from 1 billion in 1800 to 7 billion today.

However, just about everywhere in the world now populations are stable or declining.  They are expected to peak at 8-9 billion and then drop.  In plenty of developed countries they are already dropping and immigration is plugging the gap.

So why is this the case?  If the desire to procreate and reproduce is an evolutionary imperative.  Why has it stopped in the last 50 years?  People are still having sex, but not reproducing and they have stopped reproducing in essentially 1 or 2 generations.

So in that case the cause is a desire to have sex, not the desire or biological imperative to reproduce.

If you read the evolutionists writings they seem to suggest the opposite.  That human attractiveness is caused by a desire to pass on their genes and sex is the mechanism to do that, but procreation (the end) causes sex (the means) to be desirable (at a biological level).

Person A is attracted to X trait. Person B is attracted to Y trait. X trait is beneficial, Y trait is bad. Person A's more likely to have healthy kids live long enough to have kids of their own, so over time everyone(or the vast majority of people) become attracted to X. Same process might also cause people to be repulsed by Y. You don't consciously think "Oh wow I love her clear skin because it indicates good health", but the reason you're attracted to clear skin on a subconscious level is because it's a health indicator. It's not really that your brain has some cheat sheet saying "clear skin = healthy", but rather that people who chose partners with clear skin rather than skin with boils, etc. were more likely to pass on their genes. So whatever gene or genes flips the "clear skin is attractive" switch in your head got passed on and spread to the general population. 

There's no desire to do anything in evolution. It's just a game of probability and inheritance.

Is there any evidence that simple organisms "enjoy" sex.  Do they get any reward from it by nature in terms of chemical or hormone boost?

And what of sexless reproduction?  Every living thing reproduces, but not everything mates.

I don't know what the story is there. 

Person A is attracted to X trait. Person B is attracted to Y trait. X trait is beneficial, Y trait is bad. Person A's more likely to have healthy kids live long enough to have kids of their own, so over time everyone(or the vast majority of people) become attracted to X. Same process might also cause people to be repulsed by Y. You don't consciously think "Oh wow I love her clear skin because it indicates good health", but the reason you're attracted to clear skin on a subconscious level is because it's a health indicator. It's not really that your brain has some cheat sheet saying "clear skin = healthy", but rather that people who chose partners with clear skin rather than skin with boils, etc. were more likely to pass on their genes. So whatever gene or genes flips the "clear skin is attractive" switch in your head got passed on and spread to the general population.

There's no desire to do anything in evolution. It's just a game of probability and inheritance.
I don't know what the story is there.

How then do you explain very ugly races of people such as Australian abos?
Some races are pig ugly compared to others, yet we are supposed to come from common African ancestors (science) and Adam and Eve, (religion).

How then do you explain very ugly races of people such as Australian abos?
Some races are pig ugly compared to others, yet we are supposed to come from common African ancestors (science) and Adam and Eve, (religion).

Observing that you are such a deep thinker, here's some intellectual stimulation for you, Tallinn Trad:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090403125406AAkTurV&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly95YW5kZXguY29tLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJ8yV8oI0HNHDgIdB7gMrU-ymqC_y6Gq8drp38ReS0L78oR_c3CoTzPl0KiWu9BuqaO2x4GCTqvWBEWdk2mQDq-Q-ila_h-qZCIzKqf7cACLR-xcP1sUoIqCncLmxSLueJ6cNoGLHD-mpr-kMZxs7LZGe42wrBmCfBhOgvKL3oDB

What is not being mentioned in this evolution theory is that Children are being taught sex with their own sex.  Therefore no children.  And the world is being taught beastiality with animals. Then Porn.  Then the children(if there are any) being used, abused killed for sex.  We have so called sects or occults where babies are married and used and gotten rid of.

So, the evolutionist call these actions, behaviors evolutionary, which is not in our definitions.  Evolution theory is to be rid of God the Creator of the World.  When you rid Him, you rid all of His Design.  Sounds like the Radical Jєω theory, Cabbala to be rid of all which is of God.

So, these evolutionists are wasting their time!  Laughable. Evolutionist are full of, well, we will be nice and say Opinions.  That is what the masons use to get their ideas across.

Louis Pasteur, should be a saint.  Catholic, and bothered by the darwinists.  Louis proved by pasteurizing their theories were no good. Things just do not spontaneously appear.

That’s a ridiculous caricature of the theory of evolution. Study some biology.
If you want an understanding of evolution, read What Evolution Is by Ernst Mayr