This is a great example of pseudoscience, or making some numbers look cool by making fancy arcs.

No, that's wrong. From 6 o'clock to 7 o'clock is one hour. Inclusive/exlusive makes absolutely no difference here, we are dealing with a continuous variable.

It's also wrong to start at one when counting generations. How many generations are there from father to son?

But honestly, it shouldn't really matter, as long as you're consistent, since you'll just be adding one. If you like at Matthew 1 and Luke 3, you see that the number of generations from Abraham to Joseph is very different with respect to the two accounts.

What does science have to do with that? Nothing whatsoever. That is just a visual representation of the contradictions within the bible.

Very nice graphic. I remember seeing this somewhere... Can't remember where though...

It can be exclusive in one account, and inclusive in the other. I haven't gone in depth in the matter but at this level of debate that much should be obvious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interval_(mathematics)#Excluding_the_endpoints

It's an over-glorified link graph

Lol, I'm a math major. Excluding the endpoints of a nontrivial interval (meaning it's neither empty nor consisting of a single element) of a real line does not change the length of the interval.

Answer my question, how many generations are there from father to son? There's no inclusive/exclusive convention. There's a well-defined way to count this. If you stray from the well-defined convention, then you're doing it wrong. I'm not exactly sure which passages you're talking about, but if Matthew was indeed counting it, by your terminology, inclusively, then he was doing it wrong. It's as simple as that.

Also, please do go look at Matthew 1 and Luke 3. The discrepancy in the number of generations is so great, that you can't use inclusion/exclusion to walk around it (and don't take this as a validation that your previous use of inclusion/exclusion was okay).

Yeah, it's a very decorated depiction of a compilation of facts, namely the contradictions within the bible. Why did you call it pseudoscience? How is this related to science?

Okay, that's great. Have you heard of discrete mathematics? I have, because I'm a Software Engineering major. This is what I know. You can include or exclude the bounds in an interval when you're talking about discrete entities like generations.

Do you know what the convention was in those days, in their culture? If you do, then I'd like to see your sources.

I will go look at it, but so far I see no problem (I skimmed over it).

It's pseudoscience because it is using a glorified edge graph to show that the bible is flawed, which is retarded. Theology is much better suited for such things. I know, I've studied it as an elective.