Yes, that leaves out a lot of family members, but it shows who his direct ancestors were.
No, it doesn't. If you go back in a chain, you don't see all his direct ancestors. Everybody has two parents, not just one; both of those parents are his direct ancestors; all four of his great-grandparents are his direct ancestors; all eight of his great-great-grandparents are his direct ancestors, etc. See the pattern? It's a tree, not a chain.
Highly unlikely since the people back then knew who their relatives were and if the geneologies were fictitious, people would've had something to say about it.
Excuse me? The geneologies in the Bible weren't written down until centuries after the events they detail. There would have been nobody at the time of writing who would have been able to verify or corroborate or challenge the geneologies.
They're fictional.
Simplifying the geneologies is useful to show more clearly who the ancestors were.
But you don't see all the ancestors. That's the point. There's hundreds of individuals who would be direct ancestors who are left out of those geneologies.
With a simple chain I could look at each species and determine if I agree that it is plausible that this species evolved from the previous one.
That's not even how species evolve, though. You're asking to see something that isn't possible, based on the reality of heredity and speciation.
Well, It's lovely to look forward and imagine the tree of ancestors I will have, but it does very little to prove or disprove evolution. So lets work backwards.
You've misunderstood me. Not forwards from you to your decendants; forwards from your ancestors to you.