More realistically, Wakinyan, what this indicates is that homo sapiens novus simply is not built to last. Our low percentage of reproduction could indicate that, thanks to nova longevity, our need for reproduction has decreased in response to that. After all, if the average nova lifespan is some five hundred years (for example), the urgency placed upon reproduction is significantly smaller. One child every two hundred years would be enough to continue the race genetically.
Unfortunately, the reality of the matter does not indicate as such. Animals with such increased longevity tend to breed infrequently (like novas could, in theory) and spawn a clutch of young, only a few of which make it to maturity (which novas would not require). However, in even the most long-lived, least fecund species in existence, fertility remains a prevailing sexual characteristic. The fact that so many novas are sterile and - as you pointed out, that so few novas are even physically compatible - doesn't indicate that novas have developed a new or somehow advanced form of sexual reproduction. On the contrary, it indicates that we are very likely a genetic fluke, and one that will quite possibly run its course.
_________________________
The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.