[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: mass extinctions and technology
> Granted, if the soft sediments adjacent to a densely
> populated area
> were to produce some distinctive techno-fossils, and the techno
> fossils had
> hard parts amenable to mineralization, and the sediment encasing these
> fossils were subsequently eroded away or other wise disturbed at
> a time and
> place convenient for their discovery by a the right individual....
Actually, as I was stating, the most likely preservation would be in the
fluvial and deltaic sediments, many of these downstream from the point the
material entered the record. Furthermore, also as stated, the preservation
potential of a waxpaper wrapper, cardboard box, etc., would be comparable to
those of the plant tissues that routinely make their way into the fossil
record. Futhermore, though only a few leaves out of millions get preserved,
even the fragments of these leaves are still recognizable as leaf fragments.
OK, so soggy fragments of cardboard might be reconstructed into box, but I
can still argue that most genera of cardboard box have only been around for
the last 100 years:
"Around 1850 appeared the first machine to to produce multi-layered
cardboard. In 1856, Edward C.Haley, an Englishman, filed the in England the
first patent on undulated paper ... used mainly for the confection of hats.
The first undulated paper patent for packaging was filed in New York in 1871."
This compares to maybe 1,000,000 years for an assemblage of leaves from an
old growth forest.
On your side you have the waste of our civilization, and the expertise of
its paleontologists and archaeologists. On my side, the brevity of our
civilization in geologic terms, entropy, and the immensity of geologic
time it acts upon. Only Aktuopaleontologie will allow us to be objective
in an estimation of probability.
Nevertheless, since humans (at least) are bound to water we tend to build
our constructs near water. Furthermore, since we have used water transport
for a couple of thousand years (at least), many of our biggest complexes are
in regions where neither the tide (for shores) nor currents (for rivers) are
too high. In other words, many of the biggest complexes that humans have
constructed are in *depositional* rather than erosional environments (at
least on the long term).
Near water is true, but tide and current has less to do with site
preference than does a good sheltered harbor, and width of the river
respectively. Most towns are built where the river is narrow enough to
allow a bridge., and rivers change course enough to erode away most
unattended towns fairly quickly.
If you really want to investigate this, find the funding to do
I'll do my best and I value your recommendations on reading,
Thank you Thomas,