"correct me if I,m wrong but isn't radio carbon only supposed to go back so far....and that so far is a long ways short on some of the supposed dates of evolutionism. "

There you go pete. You have done it once more. You have disproved Bishop Usser's dating of the age of the universe once again.

It appears that radiocarbon dating "goes back" to about 68,000 years

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating

Since 68,000 is more than ten times the age of the universe that you and Mr. Ham say it is please tell us how you can stick to Mr. Ham's interpretation of Genesis while you, yourself while trying vainly to refute other arguments, keep contradicting Mr. Ham's theory.

Would you please show us any small sliver of data where carbon dating proves that the universe is less than 10,000 years old (please note that I have allowed you a generous margin of error) or apologize for wasting our time with half the baked theories of charlatans and liars.