> It would be very strange indeed if the only things that disappeared were the ones necessarily to demonstrate that society was actually highly developed, no?

> It would be very strange indeed if the only things that disappeared were the ones necessarily to demonstrate that society was actually highly developed, no? I’m no expert, but highly developed artifacts strike me as the ones most likely to be fragile to entropy and erosion. In any event I’m only curious. Questioning an absence of evidence implying evidence of absence is just basic reasoning.