Does sex prove evolution is impossible? Or at least highly improbable? Why or Why not?

Gosh, I'd never thought about that. Certainly there is nothing simple about humans, or the manner in which they reproduce. How did the reproductive organs get here? After all, evolution posits that life "spontaneously combusted" out of a "chemical soup" (my terminology) and after life evolved in the oceans, it crawled out of the sea, onto dry land and evolved lungs, legs and sex organs. Wow!

Must have required billions upon billions of mutations before "it" got it right - eventually. By "it" I mean random chance. Mind boggling!

I might have been born at night, but it wasn't last night! I go with what the Bible says. "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness" (Genesis 1:26). Evolutionists might think they got here by accident, but Christians know they got here by design. LM

(((Abdijah))) Yes, we agree on some fundamental truths.

Basically, no. Sexual reproduction has evolutionary advantages -- acting to pass only species-specific information to the progeny.

Now, the simple fact is that almost every large species reproduces sexually but this is not a "chicken and egg" problem in that many intermediate species exist that have both male and female organs ON THE SAME organism. This obviates the need for separate evolution of a male and a female before sex becomes popular. It is only much later, after the success of sexual reproduction has been established, that the separate of the male and the female takes place.

Two "separate" lines of evolution (male and female simultaneously) NEVER occurred.

Finally, I ask, if life on earth requires a creator, why doesn't the creator need a creator?

And, if the creator doesn't need a creator, why does life?

Today we have sexual reproduction as well. For this to take place there must be a male and a female, each one providing genetic material which must be comatible with the other, and which must combine in order to produce offspring.

- That is at least one class you did not fail.

What allowed compatible sexual beings to evolve; and how did they manage to reproduce while they were evolving?

- The process of evolution. You NEED a "someone" in there to direct things, that does not mean there was a "someone".

Also, until they actually reached a stage where they were able to reproduce with each other, these sexual functions were useless,

- That is a Behe "opinion" you have no proof, but it has to be for your paradigm to function. Behe said the same thing even though he was proven wrong in all aspects.

Until they became functional, these organs did nothing to promote survival or to perpetuate the species.

- to prove that you would have a PhD and a Nobel Prize, until then it is an opinion, nothing more.

“And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.”

- Yet that part of the bible was plagiarized from the Sumerian tablets, poorly plagiarized by the way, and you have never proven a god exists. Again, it is necessary for your paradigm, but that does not mean it is real.

The 'thinkers' who have ridiculed you seem to be typical - not recognizing that heterosexual macro-evolution defies mathematical probability because it requires multiple (minimum of 4) simultaneous identical genetic mutations at the same location to produce one male and one female of a 'new' species. In order for that 'new' species to continue for any length of time without genetic degeneration ("inbreeding" problems"), considerably more than 4 simultaneous mutations would be required.

As for God creating man in His image and likeness - I propose that His 'image' consists of the 'observable' or, if you will, the 'scientific' elements of His existence (both physical [actual] and spiritual), and His 'likeness' refers to the potential for His character - free will.

At the time I am writing this, user KennyB is the only person who has even attempted to provide answer to your question. Everyone else offers criticism, but fail to answer.

Some are questioning your honesty in placing the question here, but your last statement makes it legitimate to be here. I guess they ridicule because they cannot answer.

Besides that, this section is chock full of Atheists and evolutionists.

I like your question and agree with your premise.

Some people's attempt to explain will use plants and animals as examples of how two sexes can be evolved or how they can have both and then one dies and the other survives and then you find a mate to match so humans bodies are like that and blah blah blah blah....yet there is still that nagging question in the back of my head as to no matter what I read or listen to is:

WHY DID WHATEVER STARTED EVOLVING STOP EVOLVING????!!!!

We are not flowers, we are not fishes in the sea, we are not amoebas, nor are we like some mutant fish that came out of a boiling soup and started changing...

We are intelligent creatures that can create things. The things we create, we have the ability to fee good about it for it can bring us pleasure and a sense of pride that we did it! We, the only living creatures on earth, have the ability to love our children and others. We have the options to make choices in life and not be driven by pure instinct. We enjoy life! We can say and express that we do! No monkey, no fish can express wide ranges of emotions by choice.

Free will could never be evolved.

We truly are the image of our Creator.

HONEST people ask Science questions in the appropriate Science section.

DISHONEST people ask Science questions in R&S, because they don't WANT an actual answer based on Science.

Thank you for making it so clear which kind of asker you are.

Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms.

- Theodosius Dobzhansky "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973) reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, J. Peter Zetterberg ed., ORYX Press, Phoenix AZ 1983

The gospel according to Darwin. The evolution of both a key and a lock without there even being a door would of course be a bigger miracle than anything recorded in the bible... but shhh don't tell anyone.

It is best not to question the holy grail of neo-darwinsim. Go in peae my child and research no more!

How many imagined human like supernatural beings are living in space and why would they need arms and legs and internal organs, like lungs, hearts, livers, kidneys or sexual organs in space!!!

Pretty much. Otherwise we would just be swimming around in that gene--amoeba sea for all eternity just waiting for a miracle to happen. :D