This interview was conducted between myself and Professor Remus Gabriel Noirlan of Gigas Genetic Research and Development Laboratories. Professor Noirlan is the Head of Operation Gigas, the largest project the team has taken on yet. He oversees the projects that fall under Operation Gigas, though still has to abide by any NDA or security clearances when asking questions. He resides on a parallel timeline of Earth to our own, so while many things are similar in their world, there are differences as well.
MF: Hello, Professor. Thank you for consenting to an interview with me today!
PN: Ah, the pleasure is mine…I think.
MF: I’m going to get right into questions, if that’s alright?
PN: That’s fine with me. It makes the conversation more direct, at least.
MF: Thank you. Let’s start with the basics. What do you do for Gigas?
PN: I oversee the projects under Operation Gigas. Essentially, I delegate the tasks to maintain the tests, I receive reports, walk the tanks, and check in on everyone through my assistants.
MF: Is there anyone above you in rank?
PN: Yes. Doctor Solan is the Lead Scientist of the entire laboratory, and actually controls the entirety of the facility.
MF: Are there more projects and assignments than just Operation Gigas?
PN: Yes, there are quite a few. Though I have to decline answering further questions about those projects. I’m not authorized to speak on anything other than certain points of Operation Gigas.
MF: That’s understandable, Professor. What made you take on such a large project?
PN: Me personally? Or the facility?
MF: Let’s start with the facility, then move on to your personal motivations.
PN: Very well. The facility accepted the project, as well as a few other competitors. While your timeline holds religion highly, we don’t have a religion in our timeline. We found an anomaly in a few different readings as we progressed our technology. When we further looked into it, we concluded that the world is heading toward an apolcalypse. Ergo, top facilities were contracted with finding ways of either prolonging or restoring life.
MF: Very interesting. I have a few follow-up questions to that one, but let’s get into your personal motivations first.
PN: Ah, well that one’s a simple answer. I get paid well for good results.
MF: You weren’t kidding about that being simple.
PN: Have to make a living somewhere.
MF: True. So, you mentioned there being no religion in your timeline. How do you feel that this has either progressed or limited your advancement?
PN: While technological advancement has certainly been boosted, we have become perhaps a tad closed-minded as a whole. There are a lot of large differences in general humanity between our timelines, and one of the greatest is how we treat each other. While we aren’t inhumane in our interactions, we certainly don’t share in acceptance with strangers or charitable needs. Everything is very ‘ends to a means’ in our society.
MF: Very interesting. You mention that your technology has improved due to the lack of religion. How would you compare your technology to ours?
PN: A good question indeed. It’s not a giant gap, to where we have hovercars or some equally ridiculous futuristic device. However, our internet is faster, our smart phones have more features, and we seem to have more storage available compared to your current mobile devices. Everything just seems to be a little more instantly available than now, but I’m sure it’s just a matter of time for your timeline.
MF: Now, let’s move on to Operation Gigas itself. What sorts of creatures has the facility managed to make thus far?
PN: I’m sure you’ll understand that I cannot speak on all of our work.
MF: Of course. Just what you can share.
PN: We have worked on modifying sharks into a Megalodon. We have attempted a Kraken, and we once attempted an Amarok.
MF: Have you succeeded in creating these large creatures?
PN: No, we can’t seem to stabilize them at that size. We have succeeded in the size a handful of times, but have never quite managed to sustain them or control them.
MF: In our timeline, we have proof that the Megalodon existed.
PN: Ahh, that’s an interesting thing there. We have no proof in our timeline, however, we are consciously aware of other timelines and have heard of many of the creatures in other realms that have since become extinct.
MF: What made you interested in genetically enhancing creatures in such a way?
PN: The original idea behind the project was to learn how to mix different genomes to determine what genes were the best to ensure our survival.
MF: Are there specific results that you’re looking for?
PN: We are looking to find the most stable traits and genes to put together and enhance the human body to make us more able to survive should we search for a new planet to inhabit.
MF: Are there any limitations on your creations? Anything you would never make?
PN: Yes, I have many limitations. First of all, human experiments are way outside of my paygrade. I also won’t attempt to bring the dead to life, nor will I try to combine animals outside of gene splicing in the incubator.
MF: Do you have any precautionary measures to make sure you don’t mess with the existing ecosystem?
PN: We do not, no. It isn’t something that we’ve considered, as our most stable subjects have not met expectations, and thus have not been released.
MF: Do you have intentions to release them into the wild? Or would they simply remain in controlled environments?
PN: So many good questions. Currently, we are keeping them in controlled environments. We haven’t determined whether or not releasing a giant, genetically-enhanced shark into open waters would be a good idea. But it certainly doesn’t sound like it would be safe, does it?
MF: Quite right. Are you only focusing on things that went extinct - at least, in our timeline - years ago? Or would you consider more recent losses?
PN: If we could get some of the genetic modifications to work completely accurately, it would certainly be interesting to restore old life. In fact, that would be a ‘stage two’ to our experimentation. However, because we don’t have as much genetic material to work with when a species is extinct, I certainly wouldn’t want to waste it.
MF: Do you only work with animals, or do you work with plants and other forms of life?
PN: We’re still in the preliminary testing stage with terraforming.
MF: Is cloning something you work with as well?
PN: Yes and no. We don’t attempt to make direct clones of our selves, but we do use that sort of hypothetical process to incubate our splicing experiments.
MF: Would you use your studies to restore endangered species as well?
PN: If we were certain we could save this world or find somewhere that they could also thrive, certainly. Otherwise, it may just be a ‘nice thought.’
MF: Isn’t the type of testing you do considered inhumane? We have laws against these sorts of things here. It’s also sort of like ‘playing God’ in some opinions.
PN: Ah, a conflict of ethics. To preserve the human race, humanity will do almost anything and sacrifice almost anyone. Thus is our will to survive. Also, please note that we don’t have religion here, so ‘playing God’ isn’t often considered discouragement.
MF: Hypothetically speaking, if you find an actual creature that already exists that you were previously trying to create, what would you do?
PN: We would examine it, and take our time determining if it was safe to abduct and remove from the ecosystem. If we could only study it, we would, but we would be more inclined to take a genetic sample so that we might determine what gene helps them thrive.
MF: In theory, could you create beings that have never physically existed? Or at least, haven’t been proven to exist? For instance, a satyr, dragon, or centaur?
PN: I would never attempt it. In order to do that, I would have to find a way to place a body in stasis, combine two bodies in some way, and then bring the new amalgamation out of stasis. Not to mention the impossibility of connecting veins, nerves that don’t technically exist in one brain or the other, making blood compatible, making multiple organs work and accept tissue that isn’t inherently that race…it’s impossible, and a very, very cruel death for whatever poor test subject we have.
MF: Do you only create non-sapient beings?
PN: Yes. I feel as though when we get to the human part of testing, we would do it in a ‘splicing’ style, where we splice the genes in a fertilized egg with whatever strand we have come up with so that we have the most natural integration of genes.
MF: I see. Are you able to transfer consciousness from one body to another?
PN: No, nor do we see the necessity in having such trials commence. It isn’t as though we have an excess of living bodies without a consciousness, and I don’t see the enjoyment of randomly switching two human minds.
MF: Now, what happens to the subjects of your experiments once you’ve finished observation or whatever you’ve had planned for them?
PN: Generally speaking, they are recycled. We harvest whatever organs, tissue, blood, implants, or bone that we can and then incinerate the rest. However, Foxx here has convinced the Laboratory Head to release our subjects into the astral for Foxx to anchor here as astral companions for spirit keepers to take in. It is a far more humane option than what we did, so I can’t complain.
MF: On that note, if anyone is interested in a companion from the lab, let me know and I’ll find one for you!
PN: Indeed. It’s certainly a lot more kind to our subjects.
MF: Would you possibly be willing to do another interview or a channeling session sometime in the future if there are more questions?
PN: Of course. This has been quite interesting, with a lot of good questions and a wonderful chance to explain my beliefs and philosophies.
Thank you everyone for reading! It was a lot of fun to get this information together for you, and I hope it helps you understand where they’re coming from on their stance in genetic experimentation!