Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

HOB not a structure....?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    well at least now the LS (whoever they are) knows the facts... lol

    Comment


    • #32
      I'm sure this will provide comfort to the searchers who have a structure for one or more of their clues. Still, I think the days of structures are numbered. Kind of like Forrest saying he wasn't ready to say whether the chest was underwater, and then later ruling that out for safety reasons. I think Cynthia will have an interesting opinion on this video. ;-)

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Zapster View Post
        I'm sure this will provide comfort to the searchers who have a structure for one or more of their clues. Still, I think the days of structures are numbered. Kind of like Forrest saying he wasn't ready to say whether the chest was underwater, and then later ruling that out for safety reasons. I think Cynthia will have an interesting opinion on this video. ;-)

        Comment


        • #34
          Forget HoB, is there any way the TC itself could secretly boast illicit structure-ties? (Not that it would be anything to boost about ...)

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Sherif Billy View Post
            I'm turning 67 in a few months..........maybe I'll do something like Cynthia.. I can see it now, Sherif Billy with tarry scant of clothing bares it all under the moonlight with the backdrop of the blaze........

            Who wouldn't want to see that? I bet I'd have to beat off women with a stick, (and in this day and age, maybe a couple of mixed up guys too.)
            I suggest you watch your language. Read what you wrote. Postings are editable.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by 1keyword View Post

              point taken.... Cynthia's quote is not a real quote. When I asked Dal if he had ever heard such a thing he directed me back to Cynthias blog (but if I dont trust her as a source?) I would imagine to have HER explain herself. looked like he didn't want to touch this with a ten foot pole... what people don't say can be louder than what they do say.

              New day.. whatever.
              Silence is not loud. Please don't contribute to the confusion in the world. It's oldsters like us that should be saving the youngsters from unwholesome influence(s).

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by HelenKane View Post
                I'd like to point out something about the home of Brown line. Forrest I believe had made a comment once about placement of commas. Perhaps we are supposed to add a comma somewhere to gain the full meaning. For example, the two following with comma added may mean something different than when read with no comma:

                If you read the line as:
                Put in, below the home of Brown

                It's completely different meaning than if you move the comma this way:
                Put in below, the home of Brown
                If someone starts messing with the poem (that is, changing it), they will never be able to achieve a correct solve of the poem. Barnum was right, and he probably under-estimated reality.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Oh, I see what you mean. That was not my intention. I tend to be a joker and like to make people laugh. I'm sorry that what I wrote did not get that response from you. My apologies.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Old Pilot View Post

                    If someone starts messing with the poem (that is, changing it), they will never be able to achieve a correct solve of the poem. Barnum was right, and he probably under-estimated reality.
                    I hardly think experimenting with a comma to try and understand the possibility of different contexts of a line in the poem is "messing with" the poem. Especially when one considers the things FF said in regards to commas and punctuation as if he were open to people correcting him. The phrase "put in below the home of Brown" grammatically speaking actually should have a comma. It's arguable where the comma can or should be placed. I don't think it is hurting anyone's chances at solving the puzzle to examine what the possible context of "put in" could mean as an action. In fact, one needs to understand that to be able to solve it. By reading the phrase with different comma placements, you can open your mind to the possibility that the phrase may indeed have been misinterpreted by many, hence no one's found the TC yet.

                    See below from tarry scant. Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot_2019-10-07-22-32-29.png
Views:	100
Size:	413.2 KB
ID:	120117
                    "It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
                    And I'm most obliged to you for making it clear that
                    I'm not here" -Syd Barrett

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Hi HelenKane: afraid I disagree about the grammatical need for a comma in the short sentence "Put in below the home of Brown." It is correct without a comma, and grammatically no different from "Park below the hotel." In fact, there's no proper place to insert a comma in either sentence. "Put in" here is being used as a verb, though I think Forrest is making clever use of it as both a verb and a noun phrase, e.g. "Put in at the put in below the home of Brown."

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X