This "calibration" of the carbon clock is taken into account with every carbon dating that is performed.
Thus, reports generally specify the ‘raw’ numbers and the ‘fudged’ numbers.However, geologists know this, and would never try to prove that something is millions of years old based on carbon dating.The major mistake Hovind makes in this article relates to his claim of equilibrium.The main criticism of the method is in the ration of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12. Libby initially assumed that the ratio was in equilibrium..equal amount of C-14 was entering the earth's system as were being eliminated. Since C-12 is converted to C-14 by cosmic radiation, and there is a lot more C-12 in the atmosphere, then there is a lot more C-12 to be hit by cosmic radiation, and thus, converted to C-14.In order to accurately date an item, one must know the ratio at the time of the organism's death. When Libby looked for evidence of this, he discovered that C-14 was being added at a rate that was 12-20 percent faster than it was being eliminated. Prior to the industrial revolution, we have every reason to believe that the ratio was at a state of equilibrium.