"we will alter the DNA so we will make species that are resistant to *parasites* so there will be less need to spray the fields with chemicals"

Some GM crops work that way. Others don't.

we end up spraying the fields with chemicals that are even more harmful to natural species

Roundup is fairly environmentally friendly compared to many other herbicides, and we were using lots of it before GM crops existed.

Monsanto has sworn that ONLY their GM technique could produce a roundup ready plant

I doubt that, because only an idiot would claim that. Hell, there were moderately resistant weeds before GM crops were available.

Most of the materials you need to build the bigger tools aren't on the asteroid so you're kind of SOL.

Right. Because iron, nickel, carbon, and silicates are rarely used in heavy industry.

If we had the technology to locate the raw materials, mine them, refine and process them, and then produce finished goods fully automatically we wouldn't use humans to mine anything on Earth anymore either.

Humans are cheap, and have political opinions. It probably wouldn't be that much of a technical challenge (compared to say, the space shuttle) to make a building-sized vending machine to replace a fast-food restaurant, but if it would cost more and get people to boycott you, why do it?

Speculating that it "could" be done is a world away from actually doing it.

True, but you have to start with speculation.

you can use the math from above to reckon the size of an object to have 1/100th the pull of the moon in a near earth orbit

Yeah. It would have to weigh about as much as 1,000 mountains and be in an orbit that you have to fight to get into.

I think we're getting ahead of ourselves here.

Bullshit. It's real. My late wife had ALS, and her eyegaze computer was worth every penny.

I understand, but I don't think that eyegaze was the kind of facilitated communication the GP was calling a hoax.

Err, Switzerland's not in the EU.

Yeah. GP has 'European countries', P has 'Switzerland', and I did some hasty editing. Hopefully that doesn't obscure my point.

Every other culture that existed at the same time each of the books originated.

You missed "he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated", and more importantly the whole chapter called "That One Should Avoid Being Despised And Hated".

Canola POLLEN can travel for kilometres, therefore his fields could have been accidentally contaminated in the previous generation

Nobody disputes that. Small amounts of gene flow are expected and aren't a legal issue.

he plants next season's crop full of GM genes and bam, field of roundupready canola

Not a whole field full. And remember that it was the "concentration or extent" that the judge was citing, not just that the RR trait showed up.

If you believe I am incorrect, please reply with a rebuttal with primary sources that prove me wrong.

From your own citation [118]: "It may be that some Roundup Ready seed was carried to Mr. Schmeiser's field without his knowledge. Some such seed might have survived the winter to germinate in the spring of 1998. However, I am persuaded by evidence of Dr. Keith Downey, an expert witness appearing for the plaintiffs, that none of the suggested sources could reasonably explain the concentration or extent of Roundup Ready canola of a commercial quality evident from the results of tests on Schmeiser's crop. His view was supported in part by evidence of Dr. Barry Hertz, a mechanical engineer, whose evidence scientifically demonstrated the limited distance that canola seed blown from trucks in the road way could be expected to spread. I am persuaded on the basis of Dr. Downey's evidence that on a balance of probabilities none of the suggested possible sources of contamination of Schmeiser's crop was the basis for the substantial level of Roundup Ready canola growing in field number 2 in 1997."

In case it isn't clear: you can't be successfully sued for accidental gene transfer.

otherwise, you are in violation of the moderator rules and I'd be more than happy to report you so that your moderation privileges are revoked.

I can't tell be sure if this is wild bluster, trolling, or stupidity - but it's likely all three.

In the land of the free even donating money is considered "free speech", go figure.

Donating money isn't free speech, but preventing people from working together to get a message out interfers with their ability to use their free speech.

Show me where in the Constitution it is enumerated that the government is allowed to do this.

In the interstate commerce clause, right next to where it lets the government ban marijuana, a bit after the penumbra that protects abortion.

That was my point - but apparently my message got muddled.