Lets examine whether it is really logical to expect monuments such as the pyramids or better from the civilizations that lived before the flood?
Our technological development has only occurred as a result of an ability to store and access large quantities of preexisting data.
Nevertheless, any truly advanced civilization would have left durable traces or constructions that would likely surface during excavations or by erosion.
Many better monuments would be built afterwards, but given God's reaction, it is logical to propose that nothing like it had been built prior to the flood.
Most people are puzzled why antediluvian buildings have not been found.
Prior to the flood, the atmosphere is thought to have been much more stable than it is today, providing an almost globally uniform temperature.
It is believed that there were no dramatic seasonal temperature fluctuations, or even significant differences in temperature between the polar and equatorial regions.
As a result of the flood, the earth was covered in hundreds of feet of sediment, and very little of the antediluvian horizon has been exposed.
It is also problematic that the scientific community is quick to dismiss any artifacts that dispute their presupposed interpretation of the fossil record.
It may have been this reduction in life expectancy more than anything else that induced the formation of the written word and ultimately the technological achievements we have made.
Back when people lived to be 1000 years of age there was little need to archive knowledge.
Perhaps it was the shortened human lifespan that caused people to feel the need to write down their experiences or what had been learned.