I have been doing mostly push processing and longer inversions to obtain the contrast i want and now i realize that my method is most likely the cause of my negs being overdeveloped unless i have shutter issues that is causing over-exposures?
Your question begs for clarification on how you are judging the negative.
Unless there is a truly gross over exposure (maybe say 4 or more stops over), exposure probably isn't the problem. Exposure changes do not change the shape of the film curve, just where the subjects fall. Exposure should be judged by where the subject matter in the shadows fell. If you didn't get the shadow detail you wanted on the negative you under exposed, if you have more shadow detail than you planned on you probably did fine. Get a magnifying glass and look for that detail on the negative or print light to see where detail runs out.
Extra exposure typically just requires more print exposure to compensate, nothing else.
The best way to judge proper negative development is to test by printing to your standard paper. If it prints "pretty" without needing contrast adjustment development is right.
If it is my method should i just calibrate the dial to the Paterson, are they known to be accurate?
I have various thermometers and none of them agree completely. As long as I only use one thermometer, I don't have a problem. Accuracy is fairly important (you need to be in the right ball park), but consistency is what is truly important. It doesn't matter if your real norm is 64, 66, 68, 70, or 72; what matters is that your thermometer indicates the same number every time.