kk
Junior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by kk on Jun 22, 2019 21:28:06 GMT -5
Just a thought for the sake of discussion. I am certain that "Casey" intended to ask how far the physical treasure chest is located from the blaze. However, the question that was asked was how far is the "chest from the blaze."
I wonder if perhaps it detrimental to assume that the "chest" in the poem is the chest that is full of treasures, and not a reference to something synonymous with a chest. If one has solved that particular riddle, than the distance from the blaze to the "chest" (but not the treasure chest) would be obvious, thus leaving room for more clues in the following stanza's that lead to the physical treasure chest.
Mr. Fenn: How far is the chest located from the blaze? ~ casey
Casey, I did not take the measurement, but logic tells me that if you don’t know where the blaze is it really doesn’t matter. If you can find the blaze though, the answer to your question will be obvious. Does that help?f
|
|
|
Post by brtlatjgt on Jul 1, 2019 14:12:17 GMT -5
I think it's interesting that Fenn told someone "if you have the right map". Can't remember where I heard this but I believe it was Fenn speaking to someone on one of the videos. Is it possible that an "old" map of the location near the treasure actually has the clues on it, including specifically the home of Brown?
|
|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Jul 2, 2019 13:19:15 GMT -5
Drifter: I'm confident plenty of searchers have solved WWWH, not just passed it by incidentally:
"Mr. Fenn: In the past when you have said that several people had figured out the first two clues and then went right past the other clues, would you say that they got lucky and just happened to go to the correct starting area, not fully understanding the poem, or would you say that they did indeed solve the first two clues by understanding the poem and clues? C"
FF: "Searchers have routinely revealed where they think the treasure was hidden and walked me through the process that took them on that course. That's how I know a few have identified the first two clues. Although others were at the starting point I think their arrival was an aberration and they were oblivious to its connection with the poem. Playing a hunch is not worth much in the search and those who start out by looking for the blaze, are wasting their time.f"
In this ATF, Forrest clearly differentiates between searchers who intentionally arrive at WWWH and those who get there by happenstance. Also, Forrest hasn't just said "went" by the other clues -- he has used the word walked:
From Everything Is Stories EIS Radio (8/8/2013): "There've been some people very close to the treasure chest. There have been people that have figured out the first couple of clues and walked right past the treasure chest. I think it's there – I haven’t checked on it, but I'm 99.9% sure it's there."
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jul 3, 2019 18:52:29 GMT -5
I think that Forrest wrote the poem in such a way as to make you look for many different things in a solve. Just as there are many WWWH there are also many HOB's. If you simply look for one spot, your chances are slim. Be efficiant and be wise, Start with WWWH but realize there are many solutions to that clue but only one which will get you to the right area. Anyone who enters this chase with one solve would do better playing the lottery.
|
|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Jul 4, 2019 16:09:42 GMT -5
Drifter: I don't know why you are opposed to the notion that searchers may have *solved* two or more clues. What is so surprising about that prospect? After 9 years one would ~hope~ that some fraction of the clues had been solved, otherwise tens of thousands of people really are wasting their time.
I have no doubt that the first two clues were solved (not just "identified") by 2013, perhaps a year earlier. And I don't see that that presents any contradictions with anything Forrest has written or said since.
You suggest that people are wasting a lot of time pondering all of the post-poem statements that Forrest has typed or uttered -- time that would be better spent solving the poem. I disagree that folks are doing that. Most are utilizing the voluminous auxiliary information as a means of crosschecking their solutions for flaws. Don't you think that's a worthwhile sanity check? If someone's solution puts the chest in Idaho, Utah, Nevada or Canada, or in a desert, or at the top of a 13,000-foot mountain, at the bottom of a lake, or hanging in a tree, Forrest's ATFs will save that person the time and expense of a trip.
|
|
|
Post by chad1968 on Jul 20, 2019 1:58:17 GMT -5
Like fenn said a blaze is something that stands out. What stands out more than the other 10 billion blazes? A rock face with 10 faces on it, one of which is fenns face. Now how is that for personalized?
|
|
|
Post by seannm on Jul 20, 2019 12:08:43 GMT -5
Forrest has said: " Some folks correctly mentioned the first two clues to me in an email and then they went right past the other seven, not knowing that they had been so close."
What was the reason for those known to have solved the first two clues, to not have found it? What might they have missed? Why did they walk past the treasure? Especially when we have Forrest saying, “ Those who solve the first clue are more than half way to the treasure, metaphorically speaking. f"
Jenny, Responses like this from Forrest in regards to number of clues are difficult to comprehend without a baseline of what you believe each individual clue is. And we all know that there is no consensus within the community as to what the nine clues are in the poem. And while Forrest has said that the first clue is BIWWWH, is that the entire first clue or was he not telling us ALL of the truth (reference to mention in the Jump Start the Learning Curve chapter of TTOTC). So, in my opinion, with out a clear idea to what each clue is in the poem, we may not fully appreciate and or comprehend exactly what Forrest is telling us in that response. Seannm
|
|
jeffk
New Member
Posts: 6
|
Post by jeffk on Jul 22, 2019 10:37:32 GMT -5
Who is the researcher that asked the question to Forrest about what lines where the clues and he told her I know you and you know all 9 clues? youtu.be/8RzrIu3hMec?t=2115
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on Jul 24, 2019 15:45:04 GMT -5
There's a few things to ponder here, one which concerns me is that it is possible to solve the first two clues and go right on by the rest and then apparently leave the hunt! This tells us either the answer to the first two clues isn't enough to compel you to finish the job (yikes!), or pehaps personal circumstances intervened and took the searchers out of the game.
It also tells us the solution to those clues is not regularly mentioned i.e. not 'popular'...
To expand slightly on Drifter's comments, we should give a bit more credence to Forrest's written replies to his spoken ones - they are likely to be more 'considered'.
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Jul 25, 2019 8:24:39 GMT -5
There's a few things to ponder here, one which concerns me is that it is possible to solve the first two clues and go right on by the rest and then apparently leave the hunt! This tells us either the answer to the first two clues isn't enough to compel you to finish the job (yikes!), or pehaps personal circumstances intervened and took the searchers out of the game. It also tells us the solution to those clues is not regularly mentioned i.e. not 'popular'... Great points..... I think it also suggests that although they identified the first two clues, were on the right track, the research and discoveries that brought them there, might not have offered enough confidence for them to KNOW they identified them. They had identified, but these 'two clues' were like all the others....just possibilities to them. And when they went, and didn't find more to give that confidence, they moved on. There was nothing with those clues that made them any more special than others they had considered, before or after.? Had they missed hints in the poem that provided more confidence to know they did indeed have the right first two clues, or is confirmation not in the poem. And as Forrest indicated, a searcher only knows they have the first two clues identified correctly when they have the chest in hand?
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on Jul 25, 2019 14:05:45 GMT -5
...but then you're not exactly 'moving with confidence'. There are so many contradictions that going back to book + poem + map seem like very sane options (and aligns with Fenn's advice).
It also raises the issue of how much of the poem you can actually decipher from your armchair. Does the Little Girl from India tell us that no further than clue 2, whatever it is?
|
|
|
Post by littlegirlfromindia on Jul 26, 2019 17:37:33 GMT -5
Yes, this is yet another head-scratcher from the Forrest Fenn statement archive. Apparently according to Forrest, searchers who correctly reasoned out the first two clues, assuming that they are "wwwh" and "canyon down", failed to advance further even though Forrest thinks the chase should become easier. I agree with Jenny's explanation plus add in that the "home of Brown" or "No place for the meek" may be less obvious than anybody thinks. Someone on a some site pointed how this puzzle differs so much from other puzzles in that you really can't ever 100% confirm the correct location given by the first two clues without solving the rest. For most puzzle-solving you can't find anything that fits a clue well, but for Forrest's there seem to be many fits for every clue. Knowing this, it is hard to have strong confidence in any. Then if you go "boots on the ground" and Forrest has some quirky idea for the "home of Brown" or "no place for the meek" that totally eludes you, then you are up the creek without a paddle. I can imagine some excited searchers traveling all the way to their wwwh spot and staring at a mountainside full of trees and rock formations saying "uh oh, now what?" Thankfully I've always loved puzzles, so I'm trying to "armchair" it as much as possible. btw, I'm not in India
|
|
|
Post by ironwill on Jul 27, 2019 0:31:36 GMT -5
Yes, this is yet another head-scratcher from the Forrest Fenn statement archive. Apparently according to Forrest, searchers who correctly reasoned out the first two clues, assuming that they are "wwwh" and "canyon down", failed to advance further even though Forrest thinks the chase should become easier. I agree with Jenny's explanation plus add in that the "home of Brown" or "No place for the meek" may be less obvious than anybody thinks. Someone on a some site pointed how this puzzle differs so much from other puzzles in that you really can't ever 100% confirm the correct location given by the first two clues without solving the rest. For most puzzle-solving you can't find anything that fits a clue well, but for Forrest's there seem to be many fits for every clue. Knowing this, it is hard to have strong confidence in any. Then if you go "boots on the ground" and Forrest has some quirky idea for the "home of Brown" or "no place for the meek" that totally eludes you, then you are up the creek without a paddle. I can imagine some excited searchers traveling all the way to their wwwh spot and staring at a mountainside full of trees and rock formations saying "uh oh, now what?" Thankfully I've always loved puzzles, so I'm trying to "armchair" it as much as possible. btw, I'm not in India Hey there I can only answer your question with experience to my spot. Please understand this is all my opinion according to my current solution (which has never been discussed by anyone). The first clue is the start of the path to the treasure. Look at it like a pirate's map with the lil dashes(paces) and then finally an X. The second clue tells you to go down a path (both a pirate's path and a path). The 3rd clue is distance defined (according to my solve). So what happens I think, is that people are going down that pirates path and going right past the point where they should be turning to clue 4. I think (if my solve is correct) that more people would get past clues 1 and 2, if they had a comprehensive knowledge of geography. Anyway I thought I'd try to help a little bit if I could. Good Luck.
|
|
|
Post by chad1968 on Jul 27, 2019 0:45:54 GMT -5
Yes pretty much what ironwill said. People keep trying to connect Brown to a person. It is a action that the searcher needs to do to change direction from the canyon down
|
|
|
Post by ironwill on Jul 27, 2019 0:58:01 GMT -5
...for Forrest's there seem to be many fits for every clue. Knowing this, it is hard to have strong confidence in any. Then if you go "boots on the ground" and Forrest has some quirky idea for the "home of Brown" or "no place for the meek" that totally eludes you, then you are up the creek without a paddle. I can imagine some excited searchers traveling all the way to their wwwh spot and staring at a mountainside full of trees and rock formations saying "uh oh, now what?" Thankfully I've always loved puzzles, so I'm trying to "armchair" it as much as possible. btw, I'm not in India And it is for this very reason that searchers need to be able to solve most clues from home, to maximize their confidence in planning a lengthy trip to the Rockies. Forrest has already told us that most of the clues can indeed be solved from home. Well I don't think he said anything more than "few" in relation to solving from home. BTW, I agree with you 100% on " MOST." I have a feeling you'll get a lot of resistance from the way you worded that reply I actually think that you can get at least 6 clues from home, and then the hard part begins. But I don't have time to get into that IMO
|
|