> 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.
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).