Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2018 8:25:26 GMT -5
Follow the Walmart Star to ...  I believe we need to follow the star at ski Santa fe look at the building. Now look at the clock on the ski Santa fe building. The clock has more merit then Wal-Mart star. It takes millions of years for a star to be born. So the hands of time will reveal your star. |
|
The Wolf
Finding Forrest Fenn
content...
Posts: 797 
|
Post by The Wolf on Dec 19, 2018 12:36:22 GMT -5
Significant progress is being made, the first visible comet in a while has appeared just before Xmas. Follow the star is gaining momentum in the Finding Fenn private sub-forum, as the final star is about to be revealed. For those who have the password, at the back of my book Finding Forrest Fenn, and want to join, we need to add you individually. Just shoot me a message. This is the link to the Finding Forrest Fenn private thread. www.mysteriouswritings.proboards.com/board/136 |
|
The Wolf
Finding Forrest Fenn
content...
Posts: 797
|
Post by The Wolf on Dec 19, 2018 18:38:35 GMT -5
What is so exciting, other than the timing of this solution release, is the full solution is ... get ready for it ... a poem only solution. Thats right, while everyone has been thinking The Wolf has gone "crazy" he has developed the unique solution with just the words in the poem with all but a few used, in conjunction with the contiguous clue technique.
And what makes it even better, it is backed up by everything Fenn has ever said or written about. No aberration is left unturned.
|
|
The Wolf
Finding Forrest Fenn
content...
Posts: 797
|
Post by The Wolf on Dec 21, 2018 20:17:57 GMT -5
The final star has been revealed. Merry Christmas everyone!
|
|
The Wolf
Finding Forrest Fenn
content...
Posts: 797
|
Post by The Wolf on Dec 22, 2018 6:40:24 GMT -5
I think you mean specialized knowledge? That is what Mr. Fenn said we did not require.
First consider Fenn said this is difficult not impossible. He said we have to do the work, we have to learn what the clues mean. These statements contradict what most people think specialized knowledge actually is. We have to learn who Brown is it is that straight forward, but we have to do the work. So how do we differentiate hard work with what specialized knowledge is?
The true definition of specialized knowledge is having access to detailed information not available to most anyone else outside a specialized or technical field. For instance both Fenn and I are pilots. Not many people know what an ILS approach or how much thrust an F86 produces, but they can learn by reading about it in Wiki or common sources. Now if if you need to know the critical alpha angle that leads to a stall, or the bearing specs for the power turbine, that is only available in technical manuals, then that is specialized knowledge. The difference is between what we can learn with common sources available to all of us searchers such as those books in "Important Literature" and what we can't because we do not have access to specialized materials.
|
|
|
|
Post by heidini on Dec 22, 2018 10:52:16 GMT -5
Take Dal's scrapbook 151 The Stellar solution. Mr. Fenn named the author Stern. While you have your dictionary out look up the German name Stern and Stella (Italian) which is the name of the lake in the floating hat scrapbook Personality Galore, you will be amazed. There is a pretty big star blaze that is a mere 93 million miles away. "... translate into French". "... German name Stern and Stella (Italian) …" How in the world can you say that this information is not … technical knowledge, of which Forrest has explicitly said searcher does not need? First of all, I have a ton of fun looking up stuff. One thing leads to another while I look up stuff on Google or other sources. I used to get lost in my encyclopedic dictionary when I was in 3rd grade. I had fun doing that, too. I’m not going to school to look up anything that is specialized knowledge. I’m simply looking up definitions. And as I stated earlier, that is very elementary. |
|
|
|
Post by heidini on Dec 22, 2018 10:54:32 GMT -5
Second of all... you should have fun, too! Fenn said awhile ago that people use words all the time and they don’t know where those words came from. That’s not a quote- that’s just me sort of paraphrasing.
|
|
|
|
Post by lookinup on Dec 22, 2018 11:00:46 GMT -5
I believe we need to follow the star at ski Santa fe look at the building. Now look at the clock on the ski Santa fe building. The clock has more merit then Wal-Mart star. It takes millions of years for a star to be born. So the hands of time will reveal your star.
Do you also see a relationship with the the hands on a clock and dates and/or specific times of the day as referenced to by FF as being connected with longitude and latitude?
I'm also very much in with "It's all about time."
|
|
|
|
Post by goldwatch on Dec 22, 2018 18:53:26 GMT -5
Just because I look up something in a dictionary or Wikipedia or Encyclopedia Britannia, that doesn't mean I have "technical knowledge" of the subject as a whole. That's the way I look at it.
No one would hire me for a job requiring technical knowledge on any of those subjects, that's for sure.
|
|
The Wolf
Finding Forrest Fenn
content...
Posts: 797
|
Post by The Wolf on Dec 23, 2018 11:10:48 GMT -5
Here is the relevant quote about "specialized knowledge". The question to Forrest was >>> "Is any specialized knowledge required to find the treasure?" Here's Forrest exact reply >>> "No specialized knowledge is required mdavis19, ... My Thrill of the Chase book is enough to lead an average person to the treasure". While specialized knowledge might not hurt one's efforts (as heidini alludes to above), that knowledge is not required. Accordingly, any solution that requires (or is based on) specialized knowledge must therefore be considered incorrect, regardless of how close it appears to fit the poem's clues. It's not a matter of "learning" knowledge "on Wiki or common sources", as Wolf proposes above. FF said nothing about needing to "learn" anything. I think we can use Forrest's own example of the proverbial "Texas redneck" to determine what would be "specialized knowledge". Our simpleton redneck is not going to know anything about all the specialized topics that searchers have proposed through the last eight years in searchers' never-ending quest to circumvent the poem to find a shortcut. And for our redneck to have to "learn" some topic deflects from Forrest's own statements. We've got the poem and TTOTC. And FF recommends a good map. That's it, plus one other source of help, mentioned below. Nothing else is needed. No external sources, no specialized knowledge that some redneck could find online. The other source of help is one's own ... imagination, as Wolf correctly points out in a separate, recent thread. I have found that the poem, together with a modest amount of imagination, combined with a map can lead one to a very specific area. My solution may or may not be correct. But at least I have followed FF's instructions. I am sorry Drfiter, but your statement "FF said nothing about needing to "learn" anything" is incorrect. Forrest is constantly talking about learning. He used the word 'learn" 23 times in TTOTC, he has the word in one of the titles and it is used in conjunction with the word clue in his memoir. There isn't hardly a time where he doesn't emphasizes learning. in the EIS interview, Forrest gave what he believes to be the best advise for solving the poem concluding with, "You have to find out - you have to learn where the first clue is." So he does mention "learn" and "figure out", which I believe is a hint to imagination like you referenced. He emphasized the imagination is more important that knowledge which I truly believe, but learned knowledge seems to be important to solving the clues as he emphasizes learning is important in his life. The question comes down to the difference between knowledge and specialized knowledge. Specialized knowledge is something only specialists have access to through specialized training or education. I do agree we do not need to look up foreign language words in dictionaries like stern and stella to solve the words in the poem, but that the clever hints he uses outside the poem I feel are game. He commented about learning the definition of words:
"Dear Mr. Fenn,
The definitions of words seem to interest you. What dictionary, and year of dictionary, do you use for looking up words? ~ wordsmith
Interesting that you would ask that Mr./Mz Wordsmith.
I don’t use dictionaries anymore. I just type the word in Google for a faster response. It’s fun to make up words and play with different spellings. When someone calls me out after noticing the corruption of a word I use, I just smile, especially when I say something that in my mind is correct but in an academic sense it’s a horrible malfunction.
For instance, emblazoned upon some of the bronze bells I’ve buried are the words, “Imagination is more important than knowlege.” If I had spelled that last word correctly it would not have had the profundity of meaning I wanted. To misspell the word emphasized my point that having knowledge is, in fact, not as important as being resourceful. Also, when I make a mistake through ignorance that ploy gives me a degree of deniability that I routinely need.
Now I will test you Wordsmith. Write down the full definition of the word “several.” Then Google it and learn that many of us don’t fully understand some of the words we use every day.f" [http://mysteriouswritings.com/questions-with-forrest-fenn-and-the-thrill-of-the-chase/] |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2018 11:12:08 GMT -5
Here is the relevant quote about "specialized knowledge". The question to Forrest was >>> "Is any specialized knowledge required to find the treasure?" Here's Forrest exact reply >>> "No specialized knowledge is required mdavis19, ... My Thrill of the Chase book is enough to lead an average person to the treasure". While specialized knowledge might not hurt one's efforts (as heidini alludes to above), that knowledge is not required. Accordingly, any solution that requires (or is based on) specialized knowledge must therefore be considered incorrect, regardless of how close it appears to fit the poem's clues. It's not a matter of "learning" knowledge "on Wiki or common sources", as Wolf proposes above. FF said nothing about needing to "learn" anything. I think we can use Forrest's own example of the proverbial "Texas redneck" to determine what would be "specialized knowledge". Our simpleton redneck is not going to know anything about all the specialized topics that searchers have proposed through the last eight years in searchers' never-ending quest to circumvent the poem to find a shortcut. And for our redneck to have to "learn" some topic deflects from Forrest's own statements. We've got the poem and TTOTC. And FF recommends a good map. That's it, plus one other source of help, mentioned below. Nothing else is needed. No external sources, no specialized knowledge that some redneck could find online. The other source of help is one's own ... imagination, as Wolf correctly points out in a separate, recent thread. I have found that the poem, together with a modest amount of imagination, combined with a map can lead one to a very specific area. My solution may or may not be correct. But at least I have followed FF's instructions. Well said😀 |
|
|
|
Post by heidini on Dec 23, 2018 17:28:36 GMT -5
Our simpleton redneck? Hmm. Seems I don’t recall forrest specifying the redneck as a simpleton.
Simpleton usually is a disparing word.
Forrest did say keep it simple. I like a lot of meanings of simple. I don’t mind playing the fool. From time to time, I think we all do.
simple (adj.)
c. 1200, "free from duplicity, upright, guileless; blameless, innocently harmless," also "ignorant, uneducated; unsophisticated; simple-minded, foolish," from Old French simple (12c.) "plain, decent; friendly, sweet; naive, foolish, stupid," hence "wretched, miserable," from Latin simplus from PIE compound *sm-plo-, from root *sem- (1) "one; as one, together with" + *-plo- "-fold."
Sense of "free from pride, humble, meek" is mid-13c. As "consisting of only one substance or ingredient" (opposite of composite or compounded) it dates from late 14c.; as "easily done" (opposite of complicated) it dates from late 15c.
From mid-14c. as "unqualified; mere; sheer;" also "clear, straightforward; easily understood." From late 14c. as "single, individual; whole." From late 14c. of clothing, etc., "modest, plain, unadorned," and of food, "plain, not sumptuous." In medicine, of fractures, etc., "lacking complications," late 14c. As a law term, "lacking additional legal stipulations, unlimited," from mid-14c.
In Middle English with wider senses than recently, such as "inadequate, insufficient; weak, feeble; mere; few; sad, downcast; mournful; of little value; low in price; impoverished, destitute;" of hair, "straight, not curly." As noun, "an innocent or a guileless person; a humble or modest person" (late 14c.), also "an uncompounded substance." From c. 1500 as "ignorant people."
|
|
|
|
Post by heidini on Dec 23, 2018 21:24:48 GMT -5
Wolf quoted FF: Yes, you do have to learn and find out ... using his book, the poem, and a good map. He has not said that the searcher needs to "learn" specialized knowledge. He has explicitly steered searchers away from specialized knowledge. So by all means learn and find out all you can from the poem and a good map. And for searchers who can't solve the poem on its own, those searchers can learn and find out from TTOTC. The problem with using the book is, of course, the potential for confirmation bias. How does searcher know that the "hint" they derive from the book is actually a hint, vis-à-vis just wishful thinking? You mentioned dictionaries. I think dictionaries are probably okay. The poem consists of words, after all. But while dictionaries may be helpful, they are not required, in my opinion. All that is really required is the poem and a good map. One can augment these resources with TTOTC, a dictionary (or thesaurus), and one's own imagination. Beyond that, I'd be highly skeptical of any other information source. Sounds like I am in agreement with you. Some stories of famous people he mentions, I look up the people. I just want to familiarize myself with them. Really I stuck with etymology, definitions, TTOTC, maps. |
|
The Wolf
Finding Forrest Fenn
content...
Posts: 797
|
Post by The Wolf on Dec 23, 2018 23:20:01 GMT -5
Wolf quoted FF: Yes, you do have to learn and find out ... using his book, the poem, and a good map. He has not said that the searcher needs to "learn" specialized knowledge. He has explicitly steered searchers away from specialized knowledge. So by all means learn and find out all you can from the poem and a good map. And for searchers who can't solve the poem on its own, those searchers can learn and find out from TTOTC. The problem with using the book is, of course, the potential for confirmation bias. How does searcher know that the "hint" they derive from the book is actually a hint, vis-à-vis just wishful thinking? You mentioned dictionaries. I think dictionaries are probably okay. The poem consists of words, after all. But while dictionaries may be helpful, they are not required, in my opinion. All that is really required is the poem and a good map. One can augment these resources with TTOTC, a dictionary (or thesaurus), and one's own imagination. Beyond that, I'd be highly skeptical of any other information source. Just to set the record straight, I was just correcting your claim to Fenn never saying we need to learn anything, which we seem to be in agreement now. I am glad you agree with dictionaries too, that is good progress. We differ on the meaning of specialized knowledge. To me if the information is readily available or can be learned without specialized training, manuals, etc then that knowledge is not specialized. There has to a definitive distinction between learned knowledge and specialized knowledge, otherwise, after the chest is found, thousands will cry foul and use the specialized knowledge excuse |
|
|
|
Post by heidini on Dec 24, 2018 8:52:30 GMT -5
Wolf quoted FF: Yes, you do have to learn and find out ... using his book, the poem, and a good map. He has not said that the searcher needs to "learn" specialized knowledge. He has explicitly steered searchers away from specialized knowledge. So by all means learn and find out all you can from the poem and a good map. And for searchers who can't solve the poem on its own, those searchers can learn and find out from TTOTC. The problem with using the book is, of course, the potential for confirmation bias. How does searcher know that the "hint" they derive from the book is actually a hint, vis-à-vis just wishful thinking? You mentioned dictionaries. I think dictionaries are probably okay. The poem consists of words, after all. But while dictionaries may be helpful, they are not required, in my opinion. All that is really required is the poem and a good map. One can augment these resources with TTOTC, a dictionary (or thesaurus), and one's own imagination. Beyond that, I'd be highly skeptical of any other information source. Just to set the record straight, I was just correcting your claim to Fenn never saying we need to learn anything, which we seem to be in agreement now. I am glad you agree with dictionaries too, that is good progress. We differ on the meaning of specialized knowledge. To me if the information is readily available or can be learned without specialized training, manuals, etc then that knowledge is not specialized. There has to a definitive distinction between learned knowledge and specialized knowledge, otherwise, after the chest is found, thousands will cry foul and use the specialized knowledge excuse “I think kids have an advantage (finding the treasure). Don’t ask me to explain that.” Children |
|
