|
|
Post by Jenny on May 4, 2021 14:39:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on May 4, 2021 16:12:26 GMT -5
Great video Justin. Well reasoned, well explained. Avoiding discussing it on YouTube because loons, but if anyone has a different quote that fits the three criteria, share it!
Fits very well with Jack's logic and approach. Was this the slip-up that helped him narrow or confirm the general area? Hmmm...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on May 5, 2021 6:30:18 GMT -5
Jack said one of his focuses was on where Forrest would want to die.....it is not difficult to believe he may have felt Forrest wanted to die in YS...... and he went all in with that belief...catching these slips....... and eventually narrowing it down and possibly being proved correct....
That Q/A at the time had many questioning whether it ruled out YS or not...... It didn't.... (Just wasn't in a dangerous area of the park, where sticking to trails is necessary)
|
|
Jeff
Full Member
Posts: 160
|
Post by Jeff on May 5, 2021 15:36:37 GMT -5
Hi Jenny and Dave, I love well made videos. When considering Justin's three criteria in relation to other quotes, I have a hard time assessing the second: mild evidence in favor. This requires more knowledge of the proposed solution. Continuing with Yellowstone, for example, Jenny posted this Featured Question in 2015:
It easily fulfills Justin's first and third requirements. But without knowing the proposed solution, we're left to guessing which "this or that" in the quote might be mild evidence in favor. It isn't as clear as the statement that Justin discusses.
BTW, the coincidence of Justin using a variation on the idiom "blown out of the water" makes me smile.
Another one that comes to mind because it involves destruction. It can be tenuously applied to Yellowstone in an inverse manner but doesn't easily fulfill Justin's second or third points. Featured Question from 2018:
I don't know of any strategic reason that the Yellowstone region would be destroyed or even involved to a significant degree in a future hypothetical war, although that doesn't exclude all possibilities. As this statement can be applied to most but not all of the Rocky Mountains north of Santa Fe, Fenn most likely didn't intend for his answer to mean proximity to a specific strategic target (such as the Cheyenne Mountain Complex). Such a meaning would provide too much constraint on possible locations.
What do you make of the contrasting statements that an eruption of the Yellowstone super-volcano will likely not blow the treasure chest to bits but that the next few world wars might destroy the treasure site?
|
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on May 5, 2021 16:53:47 GMT -5
Possibly Forest was distinguishing between destroying the chest in quote 1 versus destroying the site in quote 2. He seemed to have interpreted a volcanic explosion as fairly nondestructive if the scattering of trout is anything to go by (which I admit is weird) versus them being blown to pieces. But you could easily weigh quote 1 as evidence against Yellowstone - fair point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on May 5, 2021 18:25:29 GMT -5
The Two Questions of discussion are the one for Jack:
8. Do you know of any Fenn quotes that contradicted your solution to the poem? Meaning did he ever slip up (by accident) and throw some searchers off course? You don't have to be specific at all, there are tons of quotes. But, generally speaking, in retrospect, are all quotes by Fenn accurate?
That's an interesting question. There is one particular answer that wasn't interesting to most people but to me either totally invalidated what I was doing or was a mild bit of evidence in its favor. I forced myself to pay attention to that and considered it for a long time before I decided it was almost certainly the latter. He answered with a basic sense of fairness, and detecting that was important for me. Sometimes he said some things he realized were misleading, as with the pinyon nuts comment, and he tried to walk them back. There are maybe a couple things where I differ from his opinion somewhat, but I can't think of anything where I would say he was outright wrong.
As it was a mild bit of evidence, I don't see how revealing what the quote was would put the solution at risk. I'm sure I could not see from your vantage point anyway since I have no clue whatsoever what the solution is or any inkling how to get there. I was never even a searcher, I just followed everything for the fun of it. Can you divulge what the quote was?
I think it would, actually, so I don't want to do that
And the one for Forrest:
Your words and actions say you are a friend and lover of the environment “more than most.” Do you follow Leave No Trace and did you while hiding the chest? ie stay on established trails. ~Buddy
Buddy, I think you’re trying to get me in trouble but that’s where I am most of the time anyway, so I’ll answer your questions.
You may as well ask me if I love the air. I don’t know but, I certainly am an appreciator of nature. “Leave no trace” is a rhetorical statement not intended to be taken literally. For instance it is not feasible for you to not leave a footprint somewhere or a dry fly snagged high on a tree limb, left by your back cast. But I agree with the philosophy of the phrase. I dislike seeing beer cans scattered around when I am fantasizing that I am the only person who has ever been in that spot.
Generally speaking, there are places where one should stay on established trails; Yellowstone is one. However, it reminds me of the worn-out axiom, “If you ain’t the lead dog, the scenery never changes.” When I am in the mountains or in the desert, the last place I want to be is on a trail. Ain’t no adventure in that for me. There isn’t a human trail in very close proximaty to where I hid the treasure.f
I think a possible difference is that from the Question asked to him, Jack is thinking of something Forrest slipped up on... and in the Q/A being discussed, Forrest himself mentions YS.... he wasn't being 'asked' about YS, like in your Q/A example.
I think the fact that the Q/A asks specifically - if Forrest stayed on trail when hiding the chest? AND FORREST MENTIONS YS in his answer.....mildly suggests the possibility he was thinking about when he hid the Chest...and it being in YS... (It's true, YS could have been a mere example he used....OR it was that he was thinking about YS- where he hid the chest)
I think it very well could mean Forrest was thinking of YS...because he was being asked 'where he hid the chest'....
This is more the slip up to me....and what I find most important about this Q/A.... to me, it makes me think maybe this is one Jack was thinking about.... and of which then also meshes with the 3 criteria Justin brings up......
Is there another quote that does all that? if it keys into another location... no matter to me... I'm not set on any one hiding place....
Thanks Jeff and Dave for your thoughts/feedback....
|
|
|
|
Post by bdalameda on May 13, 2021 17:15:04 GMT -5
This quote is what I think Jack referred to when talking about Forrest making a slip-up.
That question is too hypothetical for me to answer accurately, especially since the next few world wars might destroy the treasure site. f
In my opinion, in Wyoming, this is referring to one area only. Few = Francis E. Warren Airforce Base. Few World wars, could be referring to the fact that this area and the F.E.W. Airforce Base is known for its ICBM Missiles. This would be one of the first places obliterated by nuclear attack during a World War.
|
|
