All right. So, like all good stories, this starts a long, long time ago when there was basically nothing. So here is a complete picture of the universe about 14-odd billion years ago. All energy is concentrated into a single point of energy. For some reason it explodes, and you begin to get these things. So you're now about 14 billion years into this. And these things expand and expand and expand into these giant galaxies, and you get trillions of them. And within these galaxies you get these enormous dust clouds. And I want you to pay particular attention to the three little prongs
Ne rregull. Si te gjitha ngjarjet e mira, kjo fillon qe prej shume kohesh, kur nuk gjindej asgje perreth. Ja se si eshte imazhi i kompletuar i universit para pothuajse 14 miliarde viteve. E gjithe energjia ishte e permbledhur ne nje pike te vetme te energjise. Ajo shperthen per nje lloj arsyeje. dhe ti fillon te jesh pjese e ketyre gjerave. Ja pra, je pjese e kesaj qe prej 14 miliarde viteve. Dhe keto gjera zmadhohen e zmadhohen e zmadhohen ne galaksi gjigante dhe formohen bilionat e tyre. Dhe brenda ketyre galaksive verehen keto re te medha pluhuri. Dhe dua qe ju t'i kushtoni vemendje te vecante atyre tri degezimeve te vogla
in the center of this picture. If you take a close-up of those, they look like this. And what you're looking at is columns of dust where there's so much dust -- by the way, the scale of this is a trillion vertical miles -- and what's happening is there's so much dust, it comes together and it fuses and ignites a thermonuclear reaction. And so what you're watching is the birth of stars. These are stars being born out of here. When enough stars come out, they create a galaxy. This one happens to be a particularly important galaxy, because you are here. (Laughter) And as you take a close-up of this galaxy, you find a relatively normal, not particularly interesting star.
ne qender te fotografise. Nese i sheh me afer ato duken keshtu. Dhe tani ju jeni duke shikuar kolona pluhuri ku ka me te vertete shume pluhur meqenese ra fjala, ato jane te gjata nje bilion milje vertikalisht. dhe ajo cfare ndodh eshte se aty ka aq shume pluhur i cili grumbullohet dhe shperthen dhe nxit nje reaksion termonuklear. Ajo cfare ju po shikoni tani eshte se si yjet lindin. Keto jane yjet te cilat formohen nga ketu. Kur ka yje te mjaftueshme qe dalin nga ketu, ato me pas krijojne nje galaksi. Kjo tani eshte nje galaksi shume e rendesishme sepse ju jeni ketu. (Te qeshura) Dhe duke iu afruar kesaj galaksie, ju gjeni nje yll relativisht jo shume interesant.
By the way, you're now about two-thirds of the way into this story. So this star doesn't even appear until about two-thirds of the way into this story. And then what happens is there's enough dust left over that it doesn't ignite into a star, it becomes a planet. And this is about a little over four billion years ago.
Meqe ra fjala, ju jeni pothuajse 2/3-tat me afer kesaj storieje. Pra, ky yll nuk paraqitet fare deri tek 2/3-tat e ketij rrugetimi. Dhe ajo cfare ndodh me pas eshte se ka mjaft pluhur te mbetur sa qe nuk formon nje yll por behet nje planet. Dhe kjo ndodhi pak me shume se 4 miliarde vite me pare.
And soon thereafter there's enough material left over that you get a primordial soup, and that creates life. And life starts to expand and expand and expand, until it goes kaput.
Dhe pas nje kohe ka ende material te mbetur qe mundeson te marresh nje "supe fillestare" e cila krijon jete. Dhe jeta fillon te zgjerohet e zgjerohet e zgjerohet derisa eshte kaput.
(Laughter)
(Te qeshura)
Now the really strange thing is life goes kaput, not once, not twice, but five times. So almost all life on Earth is wiped out about five times. And as you're thinking about that, what happens is you get more and more complexity, more and more stuff to build new things with. And we don't appear until about 99.96 percent of the time into this story, just to put ourselves and our ancestors in perspective.
Ne fakt, gjeja me e cuditshme eshte se jeta behet kaput, jo nje here, as dy here, por pese here. Kjo i bie qe pothuajse e gjithe jeta ne Toke fiket per pothuajse pese here. Perderisa ju e mendoni kete, ajo cfare ndodh eshte se ju merrni me shume kompleksitet shume e me shume gjera per te ndertuar gjera te reja. Ne nuk shfaqemi deri pothuajse 99.96 perqind te kohes vetem e vetem qe te veme veten dhe paraardhesit ne perspektive.
So within that context, there's two theories of the case as to why we're all here. The first theory of the case is that's all she wrote. Under that theory, we are the be-all and end-all of all creation. And the reason for trillions of galaxies, sextillions of planets, is to create something that looks like that and something that looks like that. And that's the purpose of the universe; and then it flat-lines, it doesn't get any better.
Brenda ketij konteksti, jane dy teori qe tregojne se pse jemi ne te gjithe ketu. Teoria e pare eshte qe kjo eshte e gjitha qe ajo shkroi. Nen ate teori ne jemi te jemi- te gjithe dhe te perfundojme-te gjithe te te gjithe krijimit. Arsyeja per biliona galaksi, dhe shume planeteve, eshte te krijohet dicka qe duket si kjo dhe dicka qe duket si ajo. Dhe ky eshte qellimi i universit; kurse me pas sheshohet nuk behet me mire.
(Laughter)
(Te qeshura)
The only question you might want to ask yourself is, could that be just mildly arrogant? And if it is -- and particularly given the fact that we came very close to extinction. There were only about 2,000 of our species left. A few more weeks without rain, we would have never seen any of these.
Pyetja e vetme qe mund ti beni vetes eshte qe a mund te jete kjo shume arrogante? Dhe nese eshte po ashtu duke e marrur parasysh edhe faktin qe ne kemi ardhur shume afer zhdukjes. Aty kishin mbetur rreth 2,000 te specieve tona. Disa jave me shume pa te reshura shiu, ne nuk do t'i kishim pare kurre keto.
(Laughter)
(Te qeshura)
(Applause)
(Duartrokitje)
So maybe you have to think about a second theory if the first one isn't good enough. Second theory is: Could we upgrade? (Laughter) Well, why would one ask a question like that? Because there have been at least 29 upgrades so far of humanoids. So it turns out that we have upgraded. We've upgraded time and again and again. And it turns out that we keep discovering upgrades. We found this one last year. We found another one last month.
Ndoshta duhet te mendohet per nje teori te dyte nese e para nuk eshte aq e mire. Teoria e dyte eshte qe: A mundemi te permiresohemi? (Te qeshura) Po per cfare arsye do ta bente dikush nje pyetje te ketille? Sepse ne fakt vecse jane bere 29 permiresime deri tani te njerezve. Si duket ne qenkemi permiresuar. Ne jemi permiresuar pa ndalur. Dhe duket se ne ende vazhdojme te zbulojme permiresime. Ne kemi gjetur nje vitin e kaluar. Ne kemi gjetur nje tjeter muajin e kaluar.
And as you're thinking about this, you might also ask the question: So why a single human species? Wouldn't it be really odd if you went to Africa and Asia and Antarctica and found exactly the same bird -- particularly given that we co-existed at the same time with at least eight other versions of humanoid at the same time on this planet? So the normal state of affairs is not to have just a Homo sapiens; the normal state of affairs is to have various versions of humans walking around.
Dhe gjate kohes qe e mendon kete do te mund te pyesesh: Pse nje specie e vetme njerezore? A s'do te ishte shume cudi po te shkoje ne Afrike, Azi dhe Antarktike dhe te gjeje zogun e njejte meqenese ne kemi bashke-ekzistuar ne kohen e njejte me te pakten tete versione te tjera te njerezimit ne kohen e njejte ne kete planet? Gjendja normale e ketyre puneve eshte qe jo vetem te kemi Homo sapiens; gjendje normale eshte te kesh versione te ndryshme te njerezve qe ecin perreth.
And if that is the normal state of affairs, then you might ask yourself, all right, so if we want to create something else, how big does a mutation have to be? Well Svante Paabo has the answer. The difference between humans and Neanderthal is 0.004 percent of gene code. That's how big the difference is one species to another. This explains most contemporary political debates.
Dhe nese kjo gje eshte normale me pas ju mund ta pyesni veten ne rregull pra, meqenese ne deshirojme te krijojme dicka ndryshe, sa i madh duhet te jete mutacioni? Svante Paabo e ka pergjigjen, Ndryshimi ne mes te njerezve dhe Neandertaleve eshte 0.004 perqind te kodeve gjenetike. Ja se sa eshte ndryshimi i nje qenieje prej nje tjetre. Kjo shpjegon debatet me bashkekohore politike.
(Laughter)
(Te qeshura)
But as you're thinking about this, one of the interesting things is how small these mutations are and where they take place. Difference human/Neanderthal is sperm and testis, smell and skin. And those are the specific genes that differ from one to the other. So very small changes can have a big impact.
Por perderisa po e mendoni kete, eshte interesante se sa te vogla jane keto mutacione dhe ku ato ndodhin. Ndryshimi njerezor/Neandertal eshte sperma dhe testis, aroma dhe lekura. Dhe keto jane gjenet e vecanta qe dallojne njera me tjetren. Qe do te thote se ndryshime te vogla mund te kene nje impakt te madh.
And as you're thinking about this, we're continuing to mutate. So about 10,000 years ago by the Black Sea, we had one mutation in one gene which led to blue eyes. And this is continuing and continuing and continuing.
Dhe per sa kohe e mendoni kete, ne vazhdimisht ndryshojme. Para 10,000 viteve ne Detin e Zi ne kemi perjetuar nje ndryshim ne nje gjen qe solli syte e kalter. Dhe kjo vazhdon e vazhdon e vazhdon ende.
And as it continues, one of the things that's going to happen this year is we're going to discover the first 10,000 human genomes, because it's gotten cheap enough to do the gene sequencing. And when we find these, we may find differences.
Duke vazhduar keshtu nje nder gjerat qe do te ndodh sivjet eshte qe ne do t'i zbulojme 10,000 gjenet e para te njeriut sepse eshte bere me lire te ndash gjenet ne sekuenca. Dhe kur ne t'i gjejme keto ne do te hasim ne ndryshime.
And by the way, this is not a debate that we're ready for, because we have really misused the science in this. In the 1920s, we thought there were major differences between people. That was partly based on Francis Galton's work. He was Darwin's cousin. But the U.S., the Carnegie Institute, Stanford, American Neurological Association took this really far. That got exported and was really misused. In fact, it led to some absolutely horrendous treatment of human beings. So since the 1940s, we've been saying there are no differences, we're all identical. We're going to know at year end if that is true.
Meqe ra fjala, ky nuk eshte nje debate qe ne jemi te gatshem t'a perballojme sepse ne e kemi shperdorur shkencen ne kete rast. Ne vitet 1920, ne kemi menduar se jemi dallimet me kryesore ndermjet njerezve. Duke u bazuar kryesisht ne punen e Francis Galton. Ai ishte kusheriri i Darwin-it. Por Shtetet e Bashkuara, Instituti i Carnegie, Stanford, Shoqata Amerikane e Neurologjise e lartesoi edhe me shume. E perhapi dhe nuk e perdori ashtu sic duhej. Ne fakt, beri qe njerezit te trajtoheshin si te tmerrshem. Qe nga vitet 1940, ne kemi thene vazhdimisht qe nuk ka dallime qe ne jemi identike. Kete do ta kuptojme ne fund te vitit nese eshte e vertete.
And as we think about that, we're actually beginning to find things like, do you have an ACE gene? Why would that matter? Because nobody's ever climbed an 8,000-meter peak without oxygen that doesn't have an ACE gene. And if you want to get more specific, how about a 577R genotype? Well it turns out that every male Olympic power athelete ever tested carries at least one of these variants.
Gjate kohes qe e mendojme kete, ne jemi ne zbulim te gjerave te reja, si p.sh, a ke ti nje gjen ACE? Por c'rendesi ka? Sepse asnjehere askush nuk eshte ngjitur ne 8,000 lartesi pa oksigjen qe nuk e ka nje gjen ACE. Po te behemi edhe me specifike, po tipi gjenetik i quajtur 577R? Sic duket, cdo sportist Olimpik i testuar posedon nje prej ketyre varianteve.
If that is true, it leads to some very complicated questions for the London Olympics. Three options: Do you want the Olympics to be a showcase for really hardworking mutants? (Laughter) Option number two: Why don't we play it like golf or sailing? Because you have one and you don't have one, I'll give you a tenth of a second head start. Version number three: Because this is a naturally occurring gene and you've got it and you didn't pick the right parents, you get the right to upgrade. Three different options. If these differences are the difference between an Olympic medal and a non-Olympic medal.
Nese kjo eshte e vertete, na ben te kemi pyetje te komplikuara per Olimpiaden e Londres. Tri opsione: A deshironi qe Olimpiada te jete nje vitrine per mutante punetore? (Te qeshura) Opsioni i dyte: Pse nuk luajme sikur ne golf apo lundrim? Sepse ti e ke dhe nuk e ke ate Do te te jap te dhjetat e sekondit per te filluar. Versioni i trete: Meqenese ky eshte nje gjen qe zhvillohet natyrshem ti e ke dhe nuk ke zgjedhur prinderit e duhur, ti fiton te drejten per tu permiresuar. Tri opsione te ndryshme. Nese te gjitha keto dallime jane ndryshim ne mes te nje medalje Olimpike dhe nje medalje jo-Olimpike.
And it turns out that as we discover these things, we human beings really like to change how we look, how we act, what our bodies do. And we had about 10.2 million plastic surgeries in the United States, except that with the technologies that are coming online today, today's corrections, deletions, augmentations and enhancements are going to seem like child's play.
Verehet se perderisa ne zbulojme gjera te reja neve si qenie njerezore na pelqen shume te ndryshojme menyren se si dukemi, si sillemi dhe cfare trupat tane bejne. Ne kemi pasur 10.2 milion intervenime plastike ne Shtetet e Bashkuara vetem se me teknologjine e sotme online, korrigjimet e sotme, fshirjet, arsyetimet dhe zhvillimi do te duken sikur nje loje femijesh.
You already saw the work by Tony Atala on TED, but this ability to start filling things like inkjet cartridges with cells are allowing us to print skin, organs and a whole series of other body parts. And as these technologies go forward, you keep seeing this, you keep seeing this, you keep seeing things -- 2000, human genome sequence -- and it seems like nothing's happening, until it does. And we may just be in some of these weeks.
Ju vec e keni pare punen e Tony Atala ne TED, por kjo aftesi per ti mbushur gjerat me qeliza sikur te ishin bobina bojerash na lejon neve te printojme lekure, organe dhe nje seri te kompletuar te pjeseve te tjera trupore. Perderisa keto teknologji perparojne, ti sheh kete, ti sheh kete, ti vazhdon te shohesh gjera 2000, sekuenca gjenetike njerezore dhe na duket sikur asgje s'eshte duke ndodhur. derisa ndodh pastaj. Dhe ne ka shanse qe te jemi ne disa prej ketyre javeve.
And as you're thinking about these two guys sequencing a human genome in 2000 and the Public Project sequencing the human genome in 2000, then you don't hear a lot, until you hear about an experiment last year in China, where they take skin cells from this mouse, put four chemicals on it, turn those skin cells into stem cells, let the stem cells grow and create a full copy of that mouse.
Gjersa e mendoni keta dy persona qe ndane nje gjen te njeriut ne vitin 2000 dhe Projekti Publik qe ndau nje gjen ne vitin 2000 ateher s'ke degjuar mjaft derisa degjon per nje eksperiment qe u be vitin e kaluar ne Kine, ata marrin qeliza trupore te nje miu, vene 4 kemikale mbi to, i shnderrojne ato qeliza trupore ne qeliza trungu, i lene qelizat te rriten dhe krijojne nje kopje te plote te atij miu.
That's a big deal. Because in essence what it means is you can take a cell, which is a pluripotent stem cell, which is like a skier at the top of a mountain, and those two skiers become two pluripotent stem cells, four, eight, 16, and then it gets so crowded after 16 divisions that those cells have to differentiate. So they go down one side of the mountain, they go down another. And as they pick that, these become bone, and then they pick another road and these become platelets, and these become macrophages, and these become T cells. But it's really hard, once you ski down, to get back up. Unless, of course, if you have a ski lift. And what those four chemicals do is they take any cell and take it way back up the mountain so it can become any body part.
Kjo do te thote shume. Esencialisht merret nje qelize qe eshte nje qelize qe ndryshon qe duket si nje skiator ne maje te malit, dhe keta dy skiatore behen qeliza trungu 4,8,16 dhe behen aq shume sa qe pas 16 percarjeve ato qeliza duhet te ndryshojne. Keshtu, ata shkojne poshte nje ane te malit, ato shkojne poshte ne nje ane tjeter. Derisa ata jane aty keto behen eshtra, pastaj ata zgjedhin nje rruge tjeter dhe keto behen pllakeza keto behen makrofage dhe keto behen qeliza T me pas. Por eshte shume veshtire, qe gjersa je duke skijuar poshte te ngjitesh prape larte. Vetem nese, natyrisht, ke nje teleferik. Ajo cfare bejne ato 4 kemikale eshte qe marrin cfaredolloj qelize dhe e vendosin prape larte ne mal qe te mund te behet nje pjese trupore.
And as you think of that, what it means is potentially you can rebuild a full copy of any organism out of any one of its cells. That turns out to be a big deal because now you can take, not just mouse cells, but you can human skin cells and turn them into human stem cells. And then what they did in October is they took skin cells, turned them into stem cells and began to turn them into liver cells. So in theory, you could grow any organ from any one of your cells.
Gjersa e mendoni kete, ajo cfare kjo do te thote eshte se ti mund te rikrijosh nje kopje te plote te cfaredolloj organizmi nga cfaredolloj qeliza qe gjinden aty. Kjo do te thote shume sepse tani ti mund te marresh, jo vetem qeliza miu, por poashtu edhe qeliza njeriu dhe ti besh qeliza njerezore trungu. Pastaj, ne tetor, ata morren qeliza te lekures, i shnderruan ne qeliza trungu dhe filluan ti kthejne ne qeliza te melcise. Ne teori, ti mund te rrisesh cfaredo organi nga cfaredolloj qelize te trupit tend.
Here's a second experiment: If you could photocopy your body, maybe you also want to take your mind. And one of the things you saw at TED about a year and a half ago was this guy. And he gave a wonderful technical talk. He's a professor at MIT. But in essence what he said is you can take retroviruses, which get inside brain cells of mice. You can tag them with proteins that light up when you light them. And you can map the exact pathways when a mouse sees, feels, touches, remembers, loves. And then you can take a fiber optic cable and light up some of the same things. And by the way, as you do this, you can image it in two colors, which means you can download this information as binary code directly into a computer.
Ja edhe nje eksperiment tjeter: Nese do te ishte e mundur te fotokopjoje trupin tend ndoshta do te kishe deshire ta merrje edhe mendjen tende. Dhe nje nder gjerat qe ju pate ne TED nje vite e gjysme me pare, ishte ky njeri. I cili dha nje fjalim teknik te mrekullueshem. Ai eshte profesor ne MIT. Ajo cfare ai tha eshte qe mund te marresh retroviruset, te cilat hyjne brenda qeliza te trurit te minjve. Mund ti dallosh ne baze te proteinave qe ndizen kur ti i ndez ato. Ti mund te krijosh skema te rrugeve te sakta ne baze te te cilave nje mi sheh, ndjen, prek kujton, dashuron. Me pas ti e merr nje kabllo optike si fiber dhe ndez disa prej atyre gjerave. Gjersa ti je duke e bere kete, mund ta perfytyrosh ne dy ngjyra qe nenkupton se mund ta shkarkosh kete informacion si kod dyjor ne nje kompjuter.
So what's the bottom line on that? Well it's not completely inconceivable that someday you'll be able to download your own memories, maybe into a new body. And maybe you can upload other people's memories as well. And this might have just one or two small ethical, political, moral implications. (Laughter) Just a thought.
Por, c'do te thote e gjitha kjo? Nuk eshte totalisht e paperfytyrueshme qe nje dite ti do te mundesh te shkarkosh kujtimet e tua personale ne nje trup te ri. dhe ndoshta mund te shkarkosh edhe kujtimet e njerezve te tjere poashtu. Kjo mund te kete vetem nje apo dy nderlikime te vogla etike, politike e morale. (Te qeshura) Ishte vetem nje mendim.
Here's the kind of questions that are becoming interesting questions for philosophers, for governing people, for economists, for scientists. Because these technologies are moving really quickly.
Keto jane llojet e pyetjeve qe po behen pyetje me interesante per filozofet, njerez te pushtetshem, per ekonomiste, dhe per shkencetare. Sepse keto teknologji jane duke levizur shume shpejte.
And as you think about it, let me close with an example of the brain. The first place where you would expect to see enormous evolutionary pressure today, both because of the inputs, which are becoming massive, and because of the plasticity of the organ, is the brain.
Perderisa e mendon kete, me lejoni ta perfundoj me nje shembull per trurin. Vendi i pare ku ju do te shihnit nje presion te madh evolucionar sot, edhe per shkak te te dhenave te cilat po behen masive, por edhe per shkak te plasticitetit te organit eshte truri.
Do we have any evidence that that is happening? Well let's take a look at something like autism incidence per thousand. Here's what it looks like in 2000. Here's what it looks like in 2002, 2006, 2008. Here's the increase in less than a decade. And we still don't know why this is happening. What we do know is, potentially, the brain is reacting in a hyperactive, hyper-plastic way, and creating individuals that are like this. And this is only one of the conditions that's out there. You've also got people with who are extraordinarily smart, people who can remember everything they've seen in their lives, people who've got synesthesia, people who've got schizophrenia. You've got all kinds of stuff going on out there, and we still don't understand how and why this is happening.
A kemi ne evidence se kjo aktualisht ndodhe? Le te shohim se si zhvillohet autizmi per nje mijevjecar. Ja se si duket ne vitin 2000. Ja se si duket ne vitin 2002. 2006,2008. Kjo eshte rritja e autizmit ne me pak se nje dekade. Dhe ne ende nuk e dime se perse po ndodhe. Ajo se cfare ne dime eshte se truri po reagon ne nje menyre hiperaktive, hiper-plastike dhe po krijon njerez te ketille. Dhe kjo eshte vetem nje nder kushtet qe dihet. Ekzistojne edhe njerez te cilet jane jashtezakonisht te mencur, njerez te cilet mbajne ne mend gjithcka qe kane pare ne jeten e tyre, njerez te cilet kane sinestezi, njerez qe kane shizofreni. Aq shume gjera ndodhin perreth nesh, dhe ne ende nuk kuptojme se si dhe pse kjo ndodh.
But one question you might want to ask is, are we seeing a rapid evolution of the brain and of how we process data? Because when you think of how much data's coming into our brains, we're trying to take in as much data in a day as people used to take in in a lifetime. And as you're thinking about this, there's four theories as to why this might be going on, plus a whole series of others. I don't have a good answer. There really needs to be more research on this.
Nje pyetje qe mund ta benit eshte kjo qe a jemi ne duke pare nje evoluim te shpejte te trurit dhe se si ne procesojme te dhenat? Sepse kur e mendon se sa te dhena vijne ne tru, dhe se sa mundohemi ne qe te kemi edhe me shume ne krahasim me te dhenat qe te tjeret marrin ne interval jetesor. Dhe perderisa ju e mendoni kete, ekzistojne 4 teori qe shpjegojne se si mund te ndodh kjo, plus plot seri te tjera. Nuk kam nje pergjigje te duhur. Duhet te kete edhe me shume hulumtim rreth kesaj.
One option is the fast food fetish. There's beginning to be some evidence that obesity and diet have something to do with gene modifications, which may or may not have an impact on how the brain of an infant works.
Nje opsion mund te ishte admirimi i ushqimit te shpejte. Verehet se ka fakte qe tregojne se dhjamosja dhe dieta kane te bejne me modifikime gjenetike te cilat mund te kene ose jo, nje impakt ne menyren se si truri i nje femije funksionon.
A second option is the sexy geek option. These conditions are highly rare. (Laughter) (Applause) But what's beginning to happen is because these geeks are all getting together, because they are highly qualified for computer programming and it is highly remunerated, as well as other very detail-oriented tasks, that they are concentrating geographically and finding like-minded mates. So this is the assortative mating hypothesis of these genes reinforcing one another in these structures.
Opsioni i dyte eshte nje opsion seksi i nje eksperti. Keto kushte jane te rralla. (Te qeshura) (Duartrokitje) Ajo cfare po ndodhe momentalisht eshte qe te gjithe ekspertet po behen bashke, meqenese jane te kualifikuar per programime kompjuterike eshte shperblehet mjaft mire, ashtu si cdo detyre e orientuar nga detajet me se shumti, qe ata jane duke u fokusuar shume gjeografikisht dhe po gjejne njerez me mendje te ngjashme. Kjo eshte nje teori per ngjajshmeri te gjeneve qe perforcojne njera tjetren ne keto struktura.
The third, is this too much information? We're trying to process so much stuff that some people get synesthetic and just have huge pipes that remember everything. Other people get hyper-sensitive to the amount of information. Other people react with various psychological conditions or reactions to this information. Or maybe it's chemicals.
E treta, a jane keto teper shume informacione? Ne jemi duke u munduar te procesojme aq shume sa qe disa njerez behen sinestetik dhe kane vrima te medha qe ua mundesojne te mbajne ne mend gjithcka. Disa njerez te tjere behen sensitive per gjithe kete sasi informimi. Disa te tjere reagojne me kushte te ndryshime psikologjike ose reagime kunddrejt ketij informimi. Ose ndoshta eshte per shkak te kemikaleve.
But when you see an increase of that order of magnitude in a condition, either you're not measuring it right or there's something going on very quickly, and it may be evolution in real time.
Por kur veren nje rritje te kesaj rendesie edhepse ndoshta nuk je duke e matur mire, ose ndoshta dicka ndodhe per shume shpejte, dhe mund te behet nje evolucion ne kohe reale.
Here's the bottom line. What I think we are doing is we're transitioning as a species. And I didn't think this when Steve Gullans and I started writing together. I think we're transitioning into Homo evolutis that, for better or worse, is not just a hominid that's conscious of his or her environment, it's a hominid that's beginning to directly and deliberately control the evolution of its own species, of bacteria, of plants, of animals. And I think that's such an order of magnitude change that your grandkids or your great-grandkids may be a species very different from you.
Ja edhe dicka. Ajo cfare mendoj une qe ne po bejme eshte qe po zhvillohemi shume si qenie. Dhe kete nuk e kam menduar kur une dhe Steve Gullans filluam te shkruanim se bashku. Une mendoj se po parakalojme afer Homo evolutis qe, per mire ose per keq, nuk eshte vetem nje hominid i vetedijshem per ambientin e tij/saj eshte nje hominid qe po fillon te kontrolloj evolucionin e qenieve te tij drejtpersedrejti apo qellimisht te bakterieve, bimeve dhe kafsheve. Dhe une mendoj se ky eshte nje ndryshim kaq i madh sa qe gjeneratat e ardhshme mund te jene qenie shume te ndryshme.
Thank you very much.
Ju faleminderit shume.
(Applause)
(Duartrokitje)