Ann O'Maly

His 'discovery' was, in fact, what had long been already known and established in ANE and biblical scholarship. His downfall was believing that the Society was interested in the truth of the matter. Unfortunately, the responses from HQ were inadequate, rehashing what had already been questioned or rebutted, and they repeated platitudes and promises to address the evidence - which they didn't do. Instead, they urged him to keep quiet and instigated a nasty smear campaign against him. This is what alienated COJ from the org and caused him so much frustration and hurt.
'In the end the truth will eventually always come out'? The truth had already come out - several times before COJ's treatise. The truth had been flagged up in Russell's day, in Rutherford's day, and many times since, by those inside the org and by never-been-JWs. Even now, had COJ 'waited on Jehovah' to change matters, he would still be waiting - 40 years later. The ones who first alerted Russell to the errors are long dead now. Could it be that Jehovah has been nudging and jabbing the leaders of His people to make corrections all along, but they've been ignoring Him?

His 'discovery' was, in fact, what had long been already known and established in ANE and biblical scholarship. His downfall was believing that the Society was interested in the truth of the matter. Unfortunately, the responses from HQ were inadequate, rehashing what had already been questioned or rebutted, and they repeated platitudes and promises to address the evidence - which they didn't do. Instead, they urged him to keep quiet and instigated a nasty smear campaign against him. This is what alienated COJ from the org and caused him so much frustration and hurt.
'In the end the truth will eventually always come out'? The truth had already come out - several times before COJ's treatise. The truth had been flagged up in Russell's day, in Rutherford's day, and many times since, by those inside the org and by never-been-JWs. Even now, had COJ 'waited on Jehovah' to change matters, he would still be waiting - 40 years later. The ones who first alerted Russell to the errors are long dead now. Could it be that Jehovah has been nudging and jabbing the leaders of His people to make corrections all along, but they've been ignoring Him?

His 'discovery' was, in fact, what had long been already known and established in ANE and biblical scholarship. His downfall was believing that the Society was interested in the truth of the matter. Unfortunately, the responses from HQ were inadequate, rehashing what had already been questioned or rebutted, and they repeated platitudes and promises to address the evidence - which they didn't do. Instead, they urged him to keep quiet and instigated a nasty smear campaign against him. This is what alienated COJ from the org and caused him so much frustration and hurt.
'In the end the truth will eventually always come out'? The truth had already come out - several times before COJ's treatise. The truth had been flagged up in Russell's day, in Rutherford's day, and many times since, by those inside the org and by never-been-JWs. Even now, had COJ 'waited on Jehovah' to change matters, he would still be waiting - 40 years later. The ones who first alerted Russell to the errors are long dead now. Could it be that Jehovah has been nudging and jabbing the leaders of His people to make corrections all along, but they've been ignoring Him?

His 'discovery' was, in fact, what had long been already known and established in ANE and biblical scholarship. His downfall was believing that the Society was interested in the truth of the matter. Unfortunately, the responses from HQ were inadequate, rehashing what had already been questioned or rebutted, and they repeated platitudes and promises to address the evidence - which they didn't do. Instead, they urged him to keep quiet and instigated a nasty smear campaign against him. This is what alienated COJ from the org and caused him so much frustration and hurt.
'In the end the truth will eventually always come out'? The truth had already come out - several times before COJ's treatise. The truth had been flagged up in Russell's day, in Rutherford's day, and many times since, by those inside the org and by never-been-JWs. Even now, had COJ 'waited on Jehovah' to change matters, he would still be waiting - 40 years later. The ones who first alerted Russell to the errors are long dead now. Could it be that Jehovah has been nudging and jabbing the leaders of His people to make corrections all along, but they've been ignoring Him?

though not especially relevant, I came across this witticism:
Give a man a poem and he will starve for a day. Teach him to be a poet, and he will starve for a lifetime.

Watch out, Jesus. Brother Rando has elbowed you off your judgment seat and consigned JW Insider to the fire.

What Jesus said bears repeating:
(Luke 21:8) . . .He said: “Look out that you are not misled, for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am he,’ and, ‘The due time is near.’ Do not go after them.
 

[sarcasm] It's too bad there was no pure worship during the time of Jesus and during the lives of the apostles. Otherwise the true Christian faith could have been built upon the foundation of Jesus and the apostles. [/sarcasm]

Christendom likes to take verses out of context. Many people in Christendom take this verse to mean exactly what most of us Witnesses do. Hundreds of commentators, preachers, and commentaries from Christendom also say that Jesus here predicted signs that would give us an indication of what the last days will be like before the great tribulation. 
Without the context it might sound like Christendom is right. But here's what Christendom was missing.  Note the difference between these two conversations:
Jesus: These buildings you are so impressed with are all going to be toppled to the ground?
Disciples: Tell us when that's going to happen, Jesus. What will be a sign we should look for so we know when the END is about to happen?
Jesus: Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another.
Now if that is what happened, then Christendom and the Watchtower Society would be correct about their interpretation. But now look at what Jesus really said with more of the chapter's context. The differences will be highlighted in red:
Jesus: These buildings you are so impressed with are all going to be toppled to the ground?
Disciples: Tell us when that's going to happen, Jesus. What will be a sign we should look for so we know when the END is about to happen?
Jesus: LOOK OUT THAT NOBODY MISLEADS YOU. FOR many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ AND WILL MISLEAD MANY. 6 You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. SEE THAT YOU ARE NOT ALARMED, FOR THESE THINGS MUST TAKE PLACE, BUT THE END IS NOT YET. FOR Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another. ALL THESE THINGS are a BEGINNING of pangs of distress. . . . Many false prophets will arise and MISLEAD many. . . . But the one who has endured to the END will be saved. . . . THEREFORE, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation . . . begin FLEEING. . . . Keep praying that your FLIGHT may not occur in wintertime nor on the Sabbath day. For THEN there will be great tribulation. . . .  “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ DO NOT BELIEVE IT. For FALSE Christs and FALSE prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to MISLEAD, if possible, even the chosen ones. Look! I HAVE FOREWARNED YOU. Therefore, if people say to you, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ DO NOT GO OUT; ‘Look! He is in the inner rooms,’ DO NOT BELIEVE IT. For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be. . . . . Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.
 
Yes, that's a lot of context. But when you look at all of it you see that Jesus isn't just saying "OK. You want signs? Here are your signs." Instead he is saying "OK. You want signs? DON'T BE MISLED!" So if this were any other situation we could probably guess what the problem is: Jesus is saying that it's going to be easy to misled about SIGNS! That really starts to be obvious when we begin noticing phrases like "THE END IS NOT YET." "IT'S THE ONE WHO ENDURES TO THE END." "THEN THE END WILL COME.". Jesus says that these are not signs of the END they are just the BEGINNING!
Remember that they are asking about a PAROUSIA and a SYNTELEIA, both terms they associate with the FINAL END. And they obviously associate a judgment event on Jerusalem with the FINAL END. In fact Jesus had just done this for them at the end of the previous chapter leading up to the question:
(Matthew 23:33-38) . . .how will you flee from the judgment of Ge·henʹna? . . . 35 so that there may come upon you all the righteous blood spilled on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zech·a·riʹah . . .  36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. 37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem,. . .  38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you.
So, they were asking about this final end, this final judgment event on Jerusalem, asking WHEN these things will happen, and asking for a warning sign either to save themselves in time, or sound the alarm in time for others. So Jesus keeps repeating  "DON'T BE MISLED," and states very clearly that wars and earthquakes are no reason to "sound the ALARM." (The word for alarmed here is from the term to cry out.) It can only be one of two things: either there is no sign to look for or it is something besides wars, earthquakes and famines. That would be completely logical to us in any other context. It's just that this one has already been explained a certain way, and we don't really WANT to believe that way could be wrong. It's the same way that a lot of folks in Christendom see it too. But true Christians are asked to "pay more than the usual attention" to what Jesus says. It's tempting to believe it in the traditional way we have been taught, because everyone wants to believe that Jesus was talking about their own generation here. Bible commentators going back to the 1700's also tried to confirm that this must refer to their own generation, and how things just couldn't get worse.
But that was Jesus' point. Wars and famines and earthquakes were not the sign of the end, because when the end came you would know it from that fact that it would be much worse. You might have to survive through persecution and even being killed. But even this wasn't necessarily the end yet.
To answer the question about a warning sign, Jesus did say that there would be a chance when the tribulation was cut short, for them to flee. When they saw that opportunity it was too late to do anything else. It would be a flight. And they were still being warned about being misled. What would these false Christ's and false prophets be saying that could mislead them? Clearly, they would claim that they knew the signs to declare that the end was close. They could claim that Christ had already returned even though they couldn't see him. They could claim he was just off in the wilderness, or in an inner room. In other words, invisible. But Jesus made it clear that no one could miss a parousia (judgment event) like this one. He said it would be like lightning -- not invisible lightning as some here have claimed -- but like lightning that shines from one horizon to the other horizon.
Also they are reminded that in spite of their request for a sign, no one was going to know the timing of this parousia. It would be a surprise just like in the days of Noah when suddenly one day it started to rain.
 

In Daniel 4, Daniel said he did know the interpretation of the dream and gave it to the king. Do you not believe him?
'Times' (iddan) do not necessarily mean years. Cp. Dan. 2:8; 3:5, 15; 7:12. But why could these 'times' not be merely contemporaneous with the historical period? Is there a Scriptural basis for concluding otherwise?
Jesus indicated nothing about the '7 times' and made no link with Dan. 4.
'It must be the same.' A mere assertion. Where in Scripture has this conclusion sprung from? Besides, Jesus was speaking in the future tense  - "will be trampled" - i.e. at the time he spoke, what he had in mind hadn't happened yet.
Whoa. We have several knight-jump eisegetical leaps, there. Where is the Scriptural link between the '7 times' of Daniel 4, which Daniel specifically applied to the period of Nebuchadnezzar's madness, and Revelation's '3.5 times' relating to an entirely different apocalyptic vision given about 5 centuries later? And then a random 'day-for-a-year' formula lobbed into the interpretive cauldron - where in Daniel does it say we have to use this for the tree dream?
So to recap:
Daniel knew the interpretation of the tree dream - it wasn't sealed information 'Times' may not mean 'years' anyway, given the word's other usage within the book of Daniel There is no Scriptural prophetic connection between Luke 21:24 and Dan. 4 There is no Scriptural basis for applying some 'day-for-a-year' formula to Dan. 4 And to add to that, the Org has dispensed with typologies that are not explicit in Scripture!
"Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so." - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2015204
Therefore, as no specific Scriptural basis can be found for interpreting the 'immense tree' in Nebuchadnezzar's dream as the antitype for God's rulership, then we should rightly reject such an application.
 

In Daniel 4, Daniel said he did know the interpretation of the dream and gave it to the king. Do you not believe him?
'Times' (iddan) do not necessarily mean years. Cp. Dan. 2:8; 3:5, 15; 7:12. But why could these 'times' not be merely contemporaneous with the historical period? Is there a Scriptural basis for concluding otherwise?
Jesus indicated nothing about the '7 times' and made no link with Dan. 4.
'It must be the same.' A mere assertion. Where in Scripture has this conclusion sprung from? Besides, Jesus was speaking in the future tense  - "will be trampled" - i.e. at the time he spoke, what he had in mind hadn't happened yet.
Whoa. We have several knight-jump eisegetical leaps, there. Where is the Scriptural link between the '7 times' of Daniel 4, which Daniel specifically applied to the period of Nebuchadnezzar's madness, and Revelation's '3.5 times' relating to an entirely different apocalyptic vision given about 5 centuries later? And then a random 'day-for-a-year' formula lobbed into the interpretive cauldron - where in Daniel does it say we have to use this for the tree dream?
So to recap:
Daniel knew the interpretation of the tree dream - it wasn't sealed information 'Times' may not mean 'years' anyway, given the word's other usage within the book of Daniel There is no Scriptural prophetic connection between Luke 21:24 and Dan. 4 There is no Scriptural basis for applying some 'day-for-a-year' formula to Dan. 4 And to add to that, the Org has dispensed with typologies that are not explicit in Scripture!
"Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so." - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2015204
Therefore, as no specific Scriptural basis can be found for interpreting the 'immense tree' in Nebuchadnezzar's dream as the antitype for God's rulership, then we should rightly reject such an application.
 

All I see is JW.org's unsubstantiated assertions that there is a second fullfillment. So please, highlight the relevant part that gives Scriptural basis.

Blowing smoke then. You cannot make a robust defense, @bruceq. Perhaps someone else can help you. Anyone?

In Daniel 4, Daniel said he did know the interpretation of the dream and gave it to the king. Do you not believe him?
'Times' (iddan) do not necessarily mean years. Cp. Dan. 2:8; 3:5, 15; 7:12. But why could these 'times' not be merely contemporaneous with the historical period? Is there a Scriptural basis for concluding otherwise?
Jesus indicated nothing about the '7 times' and made no link with Dan. 4.
'It must be the same.' A mere assertion. Where in Scripture has this conclusion sprung from? Besides, Jesus was speaking in the future tense  - "will be trampled" - i.e. at the time he spoke, what he had in mind hadn't happened yet.
Whoa. We have several knight-jump eisegetical leaps, there. Where is the Scriptural link between the '7 times' of Daniel 4, which Daniel specifically applied to the period of Nebuchadnezzar's madness, and Revelation's '3.5 times' relating to an entirely different apocalyptic vision given about 5 centuries later? And then a random 'day-for-a-year' formula lobbed into the interpretive cauldron - where in Daniel does it say we have to use this for the tree dream?
So to recap:
Daniel knew the interpretation of the tree dream - it wasn't sealed information 'Times' may not mean 'years' anyway, given the word's other usage within the book of Daniel There is no Scriptural prophetic connection between Luke 21:24 and Dan. 4 There is no Scriptural basis for applying some 'day-for-a-year' formula to Dan. 4 And to add to that, the Org has dispensed with typologies that are not explicit in Scripture!
"Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so." - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2015204
Therefore, as no specific Scriptural basis can be found for interpreting the 'immense tree' in Nebuchadnezzar's dream as the antitype for God's rulership, then we should rightly reject such an application.
 

All I see is JW.org's unsubstantiated assertions that there is a second fullfillment. So please, highlight the relevant part that gives Scriptural basis.

Blowing smoke then. You cannot make a robust defense, @bruceq. Perhaps someone else can help you. Anyone?

It's not a mystery to a lot of people. You saw it in the Insight book, so it's not a mystery to the persons who put that book together. I'd wager that even AllenSmith hasn't changed his mind about this particular idea. I'm pretty sure you won't find a lot of support for this idea even among your own congregation.

Not inconsistent at all. This dream did have a future fulfillment. The Bible said it would. The the Bible said that it did! The Bible says it was fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar. What's inconsistent is that every dream and prophecy in Daniel has ONE fulfillment, but the Watchtower needed this one to have TWO fulfillments to support a tradition.
Besides, I'm the one who believes it has a FUTURE fulfillment, just like the Bible says. But the Watchtower tradition indicates that it could have a PAST fulfillment. Jerusalem is clearly already destroyed at this point, as Nebuchadnezzar is already proudly and haughtily upon upon the vast great "world" empire that he himself has built. So if this dream happens AFTER Jerusalem is destroyed, then it is a prophecy about a time in the past when Nebuchadnezzar already destroyed Jerusalem. Furthermore, if the Watchtower claims that it was fulfilled in 607, and if they truly believe that 539 was an assured, secular, pivotal year, then 607 MUST be a time 2 years before Nebuchadnezzar even became king of Babylon. 

We're not saying the Bible is incorrect for giving rounded numbers. Rounded numbers are easier to remember. The fact however remains that, astronomically if the Hebrews had a lunar-based calendar, their months would run from "new moon to new moon" as indicated in Isa. 66:23*. New moon to new moon averages at 29.5 days. As @JW Insider said, the month lengths had to alternate (although not necessarily in a strict 30-29-30-29 pattern).
Problems arise with regard to people's interpretations of prophetic numbers - especially when they want to convert rounded or schematic months and days into solar years, in which case, a 360-day schematic year is magically converted into 360 solar years of 365.24219 days each! The method is inconsistent and there is no scriptural warrant to convert '7 times' into 2,520 years in the first place.
* Also see Isa. 1:13,14 and Amos 8:5 which show the importance of new moon festivals in ancient Hebrew culture.
It was formalized in Exodus.

Let's focus on the Bible's own interpretation instead, hey?
Who did God (through Daniel) apply the fall and regrowth of the tree to? (Read Dan. 4:22, 24, 28, 33).
 

Then you know the interpretation Daniel gave of the tree dream, and you know that it applied to Nebuchadnezzar and his kingship - no one else. The question is,
Do you believe Daniel's divinely-inspired interpretation here? http://www.livius.org/pictures/israel/gezer/the-gezer-calendar/
His two months are harvest
His two month are planting
His two months are late planting
His month is hoeing up of flax
His month is harvest of barley
His month is harvest and feasting
His two months are vine-tending
His month is summer fruit.
Translation by W.F. Albright

As @Ann O'Maly already said, none of this proves the Bible to be incorrect. As you say, the Bible gives a rounded number of 30 days, whenever it speaks of a range of dates. We don't know the exact reason. Probably for the same reason that anyone uses rounded numbers, for simplicity, for ease of calculations. I can't think of too many reasons that the Hebrews would need to calculate the exact number of days over a long period. Perhaps you can.
Thinking about a farmer, as your did, if experience tells you that barley takes about 105 days from planting to harvest, you could easily translate that to 3.5 months. If you planted on the new moon, you could expect to harvest at the full moon (always on the 14th or 15th). If someone tells you that wheat takes 120 days, then you could translate that to 4 months, and if you do all your planting at the same time, then you could expect to plant on the same new moon with the barley and expect to harvest on the first new moon after the earlier barley harvest. (Oats, if they had them, might take 115 days to ripen.) It seems to me to be perfectly reasonable that you might want to know these number of days if you were hiring laborers, or for planning, but it also seems reasonable that a quick, close estimate was all that was needed, and thus there was no need to worry about the fact that a time period of 3 months might have 88 days in some cases or 89 days in some cases. (29+30+29) or (30+29+30).
What we DO know is that if a previous month had 30 days, the next month is going to be closer to 29. If you try to call 2 months in a row with 30 days, the next new moon is going to show up about 28 or 29 days later. Ann is right that this was not always in a strict alternating pattern (which is why I said that the farmer would never be more than one day off).
It is true that some Jews experimented with 364 day calendars, to be a little more in line with a solar calendar, but even these could also not be used for very long periods without adjustments. The Dead Sea Scrolls shows that they tried months of 30+30+31 days for each quarter of the year, for a total of 364. There is a possibility that Daniel was referring to such a calendar, but we don't know.
I am sure you already know that Insight book says the following:
*** it-1 pp. 389-390 Calendar ***
Early calendars were mainly lunar calendars, that is, the months of the year were counted by complete cycles of the moon, as, for example, from one new moon to the next new moon. On the average, such lunation takes about 29 days, 12 hours, and 44 minutes. The months were usually counted as of either 29 or 30 days, but in the Bible record the term “month” generally means 30 days. . . .
Hebrew Calendar. The Israelites used such a lunisolar, or bound solar, calendar. This is evident from the fact that Jehovah God established the beginning of their sacred year with the month Abib in the spring and specified the celebration of certain festivals on fixed dates, festivals that were related to harvest seasons. For these dates to have coincided with the particular harvests, there had to be a calendar arrangement that would synchronize with the seasons by compensating for the difference between the lunar and solar years.—Ex 12:1-14; 23:15, 16; Le 23:4-16. . . . 
The Jewish months ran from new moon to new moon. (Isa 66:23) Thus, one Hebrew word, choʹdhesh, rendered “month” (Ge 7:11) or “new moon” (1Sa 20:27), is related to cha·dhashʹ, meaning “new.” Another word for month, yeʹrach, is rendered “lunar month.” (1Ki 6:38) In later periods, fire signals were used or messengers were dispatched to advise the people of the beginning of the new month.
*** it-1 p. 392 Calendar ***
In postexilic times the names of the months used in Babylon were employed by the Israelites, and seven of these are mentioned: Nisan, the 1st month, replacing Abib (Es 3:7); Sivan, the 3rd month (Es 8:9); Elul, the 6th (Ne 6:15); Chislev, the 9th (Zec 7:1); Tebeth, the 10th (Es 2:16); Shebat, the 11th (Zec 1:7); and Adar, the 12th (Ezr 6:15).
The postexilic names of the remaining five months appear in the Jewish Talmud and other works. They are Iyyar, the 2nd month; Tammuz, the 4th; Ab, the 5th; Tishri, the 7th; and Heshvan, the 8th. The 13th month, which was intercalated periodically, was named Veadar, or the second Adar.
Eventually the length of most of the months was fixed as having a specific number of days. Nisan (Abib), Sivan, Ab, Tishri (Ethanim), and Shebat regularly had 30 days each; Iyyar (Ziv), Tammuz, Elul, and Tebeth regularly had 29 days each. Heshvan (Bul), Chislev, and Adar, however, could have either 29 or 30 days. The variations in these latter months served to make necessary adjustments with the lunar calendar but also were used to prevent certain festivals from occurring on days viewed as prohibited by later Jewish religious leaders.
We don't have any evidence of the standard Hebrew calendar ever just adding a few days in a year, but there is plenty of evidence that the Jews lived under a calendar in Babylon that added a full month to every leap year, 7 times in a 19 year period. We know that even in Bible times the Hebrew calendar had already adopted the Babylonian names for the months. We also know that only about 250 years after Revelation was written that the Jews had already documented a formal a system that also added 7 full months at various places within every 19 year period. (One difference between them was that the Babylonians would use either the 6th or the 12th month for the intercalary month, and the Hebrew calendar settled on just adding it at the 12th month for each of those seven different times.)
But we don't have to go to the Talmud or later Jewish writings to know that the Biblical month was from "new moon" to "new moon."
(Isaiah 66:23, NWT 2013) 23 “And from new moon to new moon and from sabbath to sabbath, All flesh will come in to bow down before me,” says Jehovah.
(1 Kings 6:37, 38, NWT 1984) 37 In the fourth year the house of Jehovah had its foundation laid, in the lunar month of Ziv; 38 and in the eleventh year, in the lunar month of Bul, that is, the eighth month, the house was finished as regards all its details and all its plan; so that he was seven years at building it.

I forgot to respond to this last portion you wrote:
The Bible does not speak of the month as only thirty days. As already shown, the Bible, speaks of the measurement of months as lunar, from new moon to new moon. The Bible contains several places where numbers representing time and chronology were rounded off. Sometimes this rounding might have been done to make large numbers easier to remember, time periods easier to remember, or easier to calculate. We'd only be speculating if said we knew exactly why the Bible often appears to round the numbers.
For example, Jesus may have been in the grave for as few as 29 hours? So if it was just a few hours more than one full day, why do we call it 3 days. Why was it called 3 days and 3 nights? Our solution is to say it was PARTS of three days. Because of the book of Jonah, perhaps this was the easiest way to remember that it was part of Friday (from afternoon until sundown which was the start of Saturday), all of Saturday, and part of Sunday (already raised before sunrise). In this case it's possible that "Parts" of three days were rounded off to three days. Another example, why does Matthew say it was 14 generations from Abraham to David, 14 from David to the deportation, and 14 from the deportation to Christ? If you count the generations listed here, or even the variations in the Hebrew Scriptures, or the LXX, or what's listed in Luke, you still don't get 14 for each of those. (Matthew 1:17) . . .All the generations, then, from Abraham until David were 14 generations; from David until the deportation to Babylon, 14 generations; from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ, 14 generations.
*** it-1 pp. 915-916 Genealogy of Jesus Christ ***
This division may have been made as a memory aid. However, in counting the names we find that they total 41, rather than 42.
When the Bible says that 4,000 men were struck down (1 Sam 4:2) then 30,000 foot soldiers fell (1 Sam 4:10) do we always believe that it could not have been 3,998 or 30,002, respectively? Large populations are always rounded off to numbers like 5,000, 18,000 or even 500,000, 600,000, 800,000 etc. (2 Sam 24:9) Joʹab now gave to the king the number of the people who were registered. Israel amounted to 800,000 warriors armed with swords, and the men of Judah were 500,000.
Note this from the Chronology article in Insight on page 461: the beginning of         1077 B.C.E.           40 years
David’s reign
to
the beginning of         1037 B.C.E.           40 years
Solomon’s reign
to
the division of the       997 B.C.E.           40 years
kingdom
Deuteronomy 2:7; 29:5; Acts 13:21; 2 Samuel 5:4; 1 Kings 11:42, 43; 12:1-20
*** it-1 p. 461 Chronology ***
. . . the . . . three periods all may have included fractional figures. Thus, David’s reign is shown to have actually lasted for 40 1⁄2 years, according to 2 Samuel 5:5. If, as seems to have been the practice, regnal years of these kings were counted on a Nisan-to-Nisan basis, this could mean that King Saul’s reign lasted only 39 1⁄2 years . . .
 
 
But there is another point you made above, if a month is only to have thirty days and this is for consistency in working out prophecies, then why do we not use 30-day months when deciding to translate these time periods into so-called modern day fulfillments? A year of 12 30-day months is only 360 days, so these supposed 2,520 years would be 360-day years. Yet the Watchtower uses 365.25 day years, and the Watchtower uses an average of 30.4375 days in a month for the fulfillment. So what's all the fuss about consistency if the Watchtower isn't concerned about it?
[Edited to add:] And if as you say "it was to have consistency when we work out the prophecies," then why do we make a "day for a year" in the 7 times of Daniel, but do NOT make a day for a year in the three-and-one-half times in Revelation, and why do we NOT USE EITHER days or years, when Revelation 11:9,11 says "three and one half days"?
 
 

We're not saying the Bible is incorrect for giving rounded numbers. Rounded numbers are easier to remember. The fact however remains that, astronomically if the Hebrews had a lunar-based calendar, their months would run from "new moon to new moon" as indicated in Isa. 66:23*. New moon to new moon averages at 29.5 days. As @JW Insider said, the month lengths had to alternate (although not necessarily in a strict 30-29-30-29 pattern).
Problems arise with regard to people's interpretations of prophetic numbers - especially when they want to convert rounded or schematic months and days into solar years, in which case, a 360-day schematic year is magically converted into 360 solar years of 365.24219 days each! The method is inconsistent and there is no scriptural warrant to convert '7 times' into 2,520 years in the first place.
* Also see Isa. 1:13,14 and Amos 8:5 which show the importance of new moon festivals in ancient Hebrew culture.
It was formalized in Exodus.

Starting from 3:05 he refers to "an effort" that was made in past to see how Society's curriculum corresponds with normal - worldly - universities.
Then he claims that following question was asked (to university representative) "how we in five months can teach the same that for them takes two years"?
According to W Samuelsson the representative of a university replied something like this: "Your students are motivated, they have come to learn where as our students have been send to university by their parents and might have something else than learning in their mind". This is to crystallize what he said. Please watch the video for exact words.
But I mean seriously to claim that university students just are killing time in university and don't have any goals nor discipline to study is an insult towards university students. Of course there are some individuals that do fit this description but to generalize in that way! Jesus!
Further more comparing Watchtower education with University is just ridiculous.