|
Post by zaphod73491 on Sept 18, 2019 19:54:26 GMT -5
I think Jenny has been fabulous in providing a wide variety of confounding questions that Forrest was just willing to answer in most cases. :-)
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Sept 19, 2019 9:36:51 GMT -5
Thanks to the whole community who helped ask so many great questions......certainly wasn't just me! So Thank you!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2019 8:08:11 GMT -5
Below is a quote from JDA on Dal's website. What is the consensus here - Can HOB be related to a structure, and why? If it is not related to a structure, then what is it?
JDA
on May 31, 2019 at 11:42 am said:
JimB;
From the “Cheat Sheet” – There is this: “I said on the Today show that the treasure is not associated with any structure. Some people say I have a desire to mislead. That is not true. There are no notes to be found or safety deposit boxes to be searched. The clues can lead you to the treasure, and it will be there waiting when you arrive.”
Regarding a structure, there is this:
1)The ‘home’ of Brown might not relate to any structure
In Cynthia Meachum’s book is the quote of her talking to Forrest:
“When I discussed the CCC cabin as being the home of Brown, he immediately said, “don’t you remember, I said it can’t be associated with any structure.””
This statement seems to confirm the ‘home’ is not a kind of structure to be looking for.
Although the clue, “No need to dig up the old outhouses, the treasure is not associated with any structure”, was given on March 27th (2013) on the Today Show, it wasn’t clear all that Forrest was referring to. (https://www.today.com/video/new-clue…nt-23580739626)
Cynthia’s statement seems to suggest Forrest was referring to all 9 clues in the poem (or at least the hoB). This can also be supported by a question/answer posted on MW:
“Mr. Fenn, when you said not associated with any structure did that mean all 9 clues or just where the chest sits? Thanks, d.”
“Yes d, it means the treasure is not hidden in or about a structure. Google “structure” for more information.f .”
You should take note that Forrest says “ANY” structure – Just sayin JDA
|
|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Sept 21, 2019 15:52:46 GMT -5
Hi Cold and in the wood: I believe the exchange between Cynthia and Forrest was honest and accurate, and that Forrest ruled out manmade structures (like the CCC cabin) for his home of Brown. If you do not believe that the poem's home of Brown and the treasure's location are particularly near one another, then a consequence of this exchange combined with a particular Forrest MW Q&A is that NONE of the clues are associated with manmade structures.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2019 16:48:16 GMT -5
That is interesting zaphod73491. If HOB is not related to a structure, then what could it be? I have seen it referred to as an area where Brown (grizzly) bears live. Are there other interpretations for HOB that would work?
|
|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Sept 21, 2019 18:33:11 GMT -5
That is interesting zaphod73491. If HOB is not related to a structure, then what could it be? I have seen it referred to as an area where Brown (grizzly) bears live. Are there other interpretations for HOB that would work? Brown bears, beavers, moose and trout have been utilized by probably thousands of searchers. Hebgen Lake is probably the most popular home of Brown that I've heard in the Chase, particularly by those who use Madison Junction or Ojo Caliente as their WWWH. Here's an argument for why Hebgen Lake is wrong:
1. WWWH is the first clue. 2. Searchers solved the first two clues as early as 2012, and definitely by 2013. As a side note, prior to mentioning that two clues had been solved, Forrest never mentioned a searcher or searchers having solved just one clue.
3. Searchers made no further clue-solving progress until November 2015 when he wrote: "Some may have solved the first four clues, but I am not certain." 4. There is pretty strong circumstantial evidence that there are more than two clues in the second stanza. When Carol Off read that entire stanza and then said "That seems like a couple of clues to me," Forrest chose to say "That sounds like three or four to me." I believe most searchers think the second stanza has at least 3 clues. If so, home of Brown is not the second clue. 5. People were using Hebgen Lake as their home of Brown long, long before the 5-year point in the Chase.
By extension, any other popular choice for home of Brown is almost certainly wrong given that searchers were stuck at the 2-clue point for YEARS.
|
|
|
Post by van on Sept 21, 2019 18:55:47 GMT -5
This statement seems to imply that many of the clues are localized.
I wonder if ff. would consider HOB solved if it was posted on a forum, or does it only count if it was sent to him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2019 19:16:14 GMT -5
That is interesting zaphod73491. If HOB is not related to a structure, then what could it be? I have seen it referred to as an area where Brown (grizzly) bears live. Are there other interpretations for HOB that would work? Brown bears, beavers, moose and trout have been utilized by probably thousands of searchers. Hebgen Lake is probably the most popular home of Brown that I've heard in the Chase, particularly by those who use Madison Junction or Ojo Caliente as their WWWH. Here's an argument for why Hebgen Lake is wrong:
1. WWWH is the first clue. 2. Searchers solved the first two clues as early as 2012, and definitely by 2013. As a side note, prior to mentioning that two clues had been solved, Forrest never mentioned a searcher or searchers having solved just one clue.
3. Searchers made no further clue-solving progress until November 2015 when he wrote: "Some may have solved the first four clues, but I am not certain." 4. There is pretty strong circumstantial evidence that there are more than two clues in the second stanza. When Carol Off read that entire stanza and then said "That seems like a couple of clues to me," Forrest chose to say "That sounds like three or four to me." I believe most searchers think the second stanza has at least 3 clues. If so, home of Brown is not the second clue. 5. People were using Hebgen Lake as their home of Brown long, long before the 5-year point in the Chase.
By extension, any other popular choice for home of Brown is almost certainly wrong given that searchers were stuck at the 2-clue point for YEARS.
That is some great information zaphod73491. I understand everyone's focus on home of Brown since it would seem that it points to a specific location. As you note, much work has been done to determine the home of Brown but it has not led to a successful search. What if the home of Brown is not the important clue? What if the relationship between WWWH, canyon down and the put-in are the more important ingredients in the recipe? That might help explain why searchers have not been successful in solving the riddle.
|
|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Sept 21, 2019 23:02:14 GMT -5
Hi CAITW: you've hit on an important subtlety -- correctly identifying home of Brown is clearly necessary, but not sufficient for success. "Put in below" is the important part of that clue (IMO), and "below" requires the context of the preceding clues. This is why solving (or guessing) hoB in isolation is not helpful. It may also explain why Forrest equivocated on whether someone had actually solved four clues: suppose they correctly named hoB, but did not specify what they did with it?
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on Sept 22, 2019 1:20:30 GMT -5
Hi CAITW: you've hit on an important subtlety -- correctly identifying home of Brown is clearly necessary, but not sufficient for success. "Put in below" is the important part of that clue (IMO), and "below" requires the context of the preceding clues. This is why solving (or guessing) hoB in isolation is not helpful. It may also explain why Forrest equivocated on whether someone had actually solved four clues: suppose they correctly named hoB, but did not specify what they did with it? Another remote possibility might be that someone against the odds mentioned the correct HoB but was silent on the preceeding clues, so Forrest isn't sure if it was an aberration or not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 12:52:58 GMT -5
Hi CAITW: you've hit on an important subtlety -- correctly identifying home of Brown is clearly necessary, but not sufficient for success. "Put in below" is the important part of that clue (IMO), and "below" requires the context of the preceding clues. This is why solving (or guessing) hoB in isolation is not helpful. It may also explain why Forrest equivocated on whether someone had actually solved four clues: suppose they correctly named hoB, but did not specify what they did with it? Hi zaphod73491, I have focused much of my searching on identifying prospective "put-ins". Here is one my favorite resources: naturalatlas.com/map/@45.100928,-110.781828,13z Since you like to search Montana I just picked that location as an example. I hope you don't mind. The put-ins are shown as the boat on a ramp . Or, you can see some of the un-mapped put-ins with GE by looking for some kind of road (often just a 2-track) that approaches the water near an area with a gradual bank along a river (for example) that is often rocky or looks like some type of firm surface. Other put-ins may have to be found on-site and are just places that people obviously use to launch their boats/rafts. Researching/visiting areas with put-ins that fit in with the other ingredients of the recipe may lead to a hoB that would be a good choice?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 13:33:11 GMT -5
Hi CAITW: you've hit on an important subtlety -- correctly identifying home of Brown is clearly necessary, but not sufficient for success. "Put in below" is the important part of that clue (IMO), and "below" requires the context of the preceding clues. This is why solving (or guessing) hoB in isolation is not helpful. It may also explain why Forrest equivocated on whether someone had actually solved four clues: suppose they correctly named hoB, but did not specify what they did with it? Hi zaphod73491, I have focused much of my searching on identifying prospective "put-ins". Here is one my favorite resources: naturalatlas.com/map/@45.100928,-110.781828,13z Since you like to search Montana I just picked that location as an example. I hope you don't mind. The put-ins are shown as the boat on a ramp . Or, you can see some of the un-mapped put-ins with GE by looking for some kind of road (often just a 2-track) that approaches the water near an area with a gradual bank along a river (for example) that is often rocky or looks like some type of firm surface. Other put-ins may have to be found on-site and are just places that people obviously use to launch their boats/rafts. Researching/visiting areas with put-ins that fit in with the other ingredients of the recipe may lead to a hoB that would be a good choice? zaphod73491, for some reason the link I posted does not work. I am trying it again. naturalatlas.com/map/@45.101663,-110.763062,13z Maybe that will work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 13:37:39 GMT -5
Hi zaphod73491, I have focused much of my searching on identifying prospective "put-ins". Here is one my favorite resources: naturalatlas.com/map/@45.100928,-110.781828,13z Since you like to search Montana I just picked that location as an example. I hope you don't mind. The put-ins are shown as the boat on a ramp . Or, you can see some of the un-mapped put-ins with GE by looking for some kind of road (often just a 2-track) that approaches the water near an area with a gradual bank along a river (for example) that is often rocky or looks like some type of firm surface. Other put-ins may have to be found on-site and are just places that people obviously use to launch their boats/rafts. Researching/visiting areas with put-ins that fit in with the other ingredients of the recipe may lead to a hoB that would be a good choice? zaphod73491, for some reason the link I posted does not work. I am trying it again. naturalatlas.com/map/@45.101663,-110.763062,13z Maybe that will work. That did not work either. I think the commas are messing the link up. Try this: naturalatlas.com/states/montana-1929723and then zoom into an area. You will see icons for hiking, put-ins, etc.
|
|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Sept 22, 2019 14:39:51 GMT -5
Hi Cold-and-in-the-wood: yep, that's a perfectly acceptable solution for "put in," and precisely the type I've used in some of my solutions. (I actually didn't try your link -- I just cut & pasted the lat, long into Google Maps.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 16:40:39 GMT -5
Hi Cold-and-in-the-wood: yep, that's a perfectly acceptable solution for "put in," and precisely the type I've used in some of my solutions. (I actually didn't try your link -- I just cut & pasted the lat, long into Google Maps.) zaphod73491, Google Maps does not show what I intended (that I can tell). Paste this into your browser: naturalatlas.com/map/@45.101663,-110.763062,13z
|
|