Dating and correlating rock layers
Once the worth of index fossils had been established on the basis of stratification studies, they could logically be used to extend the correlation of rock formations to other continents.
At this point in time they were simply a useful tool for correlating rock formations.
Why should the percentage of lead to uranium in zircon crystals (the key to ordinary uranium-lead, radiometric dating) depend on which geologic period they are found in?
If most of the geologic column were created during Noah's flood, would it really matter whether a zircon crystal was found in Cambrian strata or Cretaceous strata, in Jurassic strata or Tertiary strata?
The depth of burial, itself, has little to do with our mystery.
In some parts of the world the Cretaceous is found deeper than is the Cambrian in other parts of the world.
Being ancient, the C-14 content has long since decayed away and that makes it useful in "zeroing" laboratory instruments. Hovind would take the trouble to do a little reading from something other than creationist publications he would not make such an outrageous statement.By 1830 Lyell's famous textbook, Principles of Geology, came out. Such was the age of the great creationist geologists!The principle of faunal succession in the geologic record was established by direct observation as early as 1799 by William Smith.Any kind of object clearly restricted to a specific point in the geologic column would do just fine.
If green dice were found only in the middle Ordovician strata, they would make excellent "index fossils." Evolution should be seen as an explanation of the faunal succession, a succession which was worked out long before evolution dominated the scene.
By the 1830's Adam Sedgwick and Roderick Murchison established a correlation between the various types of fossils and the rock formations in the British Isles.