Scrapbook 158

[Walker]

The Hopi Indians are also Shoshone Indians. The chest had to be in once Indian territory as that is what was dearest to him. Everything Indian. Amelia Earhart's cabin is in the Shoshone national forest.

Also called the Snake Indians. (Snake River.)
Some of the Shoshone moved to Texas and became the Comanche Indians.
Wasn't it Comanche that Forrest's grandmother used to watch trying to catch chickens?
Or what story was it that involved Comanche?

[OH!!]

Also called the Snake Indians. (Snake River.)
Some of the Shoshone moved to Texas and became the Comanche Indians.
Wasn't it Comanche that Forrest's grandmother used to watch trying to catch chickens?
Or what story was it that involved Comanche?

True. Sacagawea was also a Shoshone Indian in the Lewis & Clark expedition. Glenna Goodacre created that coin that is now the Wyoming state coin.
Yes, It was Comanche. The Shoshone are also named Newe. And hint of riches Newe and old.

[PrincePaco]

Well, all of the Rockies was "Indian territory" at one point. I hope you're not suggesting the chest was hidden on *current* Indian reservation land. No way Forrest did that.

For a bunch of people that didn't solve the puzzle, we sure do place a lot of boundaries on where we think it was or wasn't.

[Copper]

Well, all of the Rockies was "Indian territory" at one point. I hope you're not suggesting the chest was hidden on *current* Indian reservation land. No way Forrest did that.

How do you know that? Forrest didn’t particularly subscribe to the rules. Wouldn’t that be a logical explanation as to why Jack won’t say where it was? He doesn’t want to donate it to the government.

[Copper]

This entire continent was once "Indian" territory. (I'd better not say "big whoop".)

Right after the raid he hid the treasure. His argument was that historical relics belong to everyone. His reputation was hung out on the clothes line.

What would be the best FU to the BLM. Artifacts hidden on tribal lands managed by their agency perhaps? He ruled out so many places. Why didn’t he rule out tribal?

[Walker]

Well, all of the Rockies was "Indian territory" at one point. I hope you're not suggesting the chest was hidden on *current* Indian reservation land. No way Forrest did that.

I agree. But although Native American history and culture fit naturally into this quest, it seems to me that Forrest wanted to add an educational aspect here. Especially for the many people who aren't from areas where Native American's live.

[Walker]

True. Sacagawea was also a Shoshone Indian in the Lewis & Clark expedition. Glenna Goodacre created that coin that is now the Wyoming state coin.
Yes, It was Comanche. The Shoshone are also named Newe. And hint of riches Newe and old.

The name Shoshone means "grass people", because of their grass huts from the great plains.
That reminds me of Forrest's special places, both in Vietnam (or Laos, I'm not sure) and where the Gypsies danced.

[Knowledge]

That is the only map of Wyoming I could find from 1887. I'm not sure if the papoose was from the wood res, but I doubt it matters now.

History always matters it is what makes us who we are
Now all we have to do is be the best we can be
Everyone before us went though some kind of hell
so we could be here and get our chance at TTOTC

[Zapster]

How do you know that? Forrest didn’t particularly subscribe to the rules. Wouldn’t that be a logical explanation as to why Jack won’t say where it was? He doesn’t want to donate it to the government.

Sigh. Quotes from Santa Fe New Mexican story (6/24/2017):http://www.santafenewmexican.com/lif...799eca24c.html

“Even if Fenn wanted to stop people from following clues published in a poem at the end of his memoir, The Thrill of the Chase, there is no way to make that happen. No one dedicated to the hunt would listen, he said, unless he retrieved the treasure himself and posted a photo of the gold on the internet, all covered in mud from the wilderness where it is hidden.”

“He has doubts about his own physical ability to retrieve the chest. In addition to his hearing issues, Fenn has a bad back and tires more easily than when he stashed the money and artifacts in 2010, after a bout with cancer.”

“The chest itself weighs 20 pounds and its contents another 22. When he deposited the cache, Fenn said, he made two separate trips, and he went by himself. Now, he said, ‘I don’t know I could physically get it. I’m not as agile as I once was. … When I walk 50 yards, I have to sit down.’”

“And Fenn has cautioned searchers against trespassing on private or tribal land and cemeteries, saying the treasure is not hidden there.”

[4242]

Hey 4242, It is always good to hear from someone who only reads. I am sure you have neat things to share after all of that time.

Lion I like your post. Ok, OH here are some thoughts.

The poem is a map per Forrest so what do you need to read any map? A LEGEND!
Know-lege-nd

OH, you are spot on with your numbers theory IMO. but you need to have the word that is key IMO. I’ll give you what I believe is half the key word/number.

My theory is the knowlege should be know-Lege-ND but there should be some way to prove this correct?

know= 63 6x3=18, lege=29 2x9=18, ND= 14+4=18 they all equal 18 which is ND which is half of the key word IMO. This type of stuff is everywhere but you have to know how to use/look at it.

know legend= Double entendre-You have to know f (Indy) and the legend to the map. Half of the key word ND/18.

Why did f sign this way? I believe he is purposely highlighting the remaining uncapitalized letter in his name.
F(orrest) 15+18+18+5+19+20=95. 95 can give 14/n or 4d (14 +4= ND/18)

Wyoming= 92= 9x2=18 not counting the letter N.


This is the tip of the iceberg IMO. Why is Important Literature important?

[OH!!]

This is very alarming!
Scrapbook 158: This scrapbook has been edited by Dal, because the words "hard drive" have been removed.


An old forgotten photo on a laptop hard drive. I already know for 100% certain that this photo has been manipulated to a great extent.
But to find what I found today makes me furious. This is the first time I have ran across metadata like this and it even tells you the version of metadata editing software that was used.
What Forrest has done, is to cover up when this photo was taken by manipulating the date it was taken. It didn't come from an old laptop hard-drive.
I have 30 or 40 photo files where Forrest uses his camera and then immediately plugs it in to his computer and places it into photoshop. I can show these if you are interested.
Forrest used Photo meta edit 2.1.7 to make the date 1887. It is obvious by the time it was put on the computer that it was 4 minutes later. This was a huge attempt to cover up the date.
Why????????????? I truly hate to find proof like this of deceit, but this is exactly what you are viewing. This is not looking good at all as far as: Was the chest really out in the wilderness! As much investigating as I do on Forrest Fenn, this is my saddest day ever! I have literally found over 50 things today thru metadata that makes this day dreary. I wish it wasn't raining, I'd be working and would of never came across all of this.

Here is another that is alarming with this particular photo. Forensics has taught me to dig into versions of a particular area in order to get a date. On this chest image with the 1887, the EXIF version that is implemented into all digital cameras, holds a creation date and this date aids in knowing if a date has been changed. We all know the 1887 was edited, so we would not know the true date of this photo, but the EXIF version that is attached to the camera is 2.3. This version came out April, 26, 2010. It takes approximately 4 to 6 months to update this process into the new cameras, before they are put on the market. This places the date after August 26th (4 months) in 2010. Forrest stated when he shared this photo that it was a long forgotten photo that was in an old laptop. And he was in the state of mind of deciding what the treasure chest should contain. The problem here is that this places the date of this old photo after he hid the chest. There are thousands of articles that tell you when the version EXIF 2.3 came out, so this is beyond doubt, true. What to make of this is up to you, but this is just the beginning into the deep dive into the metadata.


An owner/creator of a metadata website, sent this to me yesterday.
Interestingly, if you look at the EXIF version, it is saying it is version 2.3 and the specifications the latest version 2.3 was released on 26 April 2010. That would mean the camera that did the recording would have needed to support that.
This backs up my opinion of the metadata, as this guy is very knowledgeable and well known.

The version 2.3 embedded with the 1887 on April fools day.

[Space Hopper]

Here is another that is alarming with this particular photo. Forensics has taught me to dig into versions of a particular area in order to get a date. On this chest image with the 1887, the EXIF version that is implemented into all digital cameras, holds a creation date and this date aids in knowing if a date has been changed. We all know the 1887 was edited, so we would not know the true date of this photo, but the EXIF version that is attached to the camera is 2.3. This version came out April, 26, 2010. It takes approximately 4 to 6 months to update this process into the new cameras, before they are put on the market. This places the date after August 26th (4 months) in 2010. Forrest stated when he shared this photo that it was a long forgotten photo that was in an old laptop. And he was in the state of mind of deciding what the treasure chest should contain. The problem here is that this places the date of this old photo after he his the chest. There are thousands of articles that tell you when the version EXIF 2.3 came out, so this is beyond doubt, true. What to make of this is up to you, but this is just the beginning into the deep dive into the metadata.


An owner/creator of a metadata website, sent this to me yesterday.
Interestingly, if you look at the EXIF version, it is saying it is version 2.3 and the specifications the latest version 2.3 was released on 26 April 2010. That would mean the camera that did the recording would have needed to support that.
This backs up my opinion of the metadata, as this guy is very knowledgeable and well known.

The version 2.3 embedded with the 1887 on April fools day.

WOW, thats a gasper.

[OH!!]

This is very alarming!
Scrapbook 158: This scrapbook has been edited by Dal, because the words "hard drive" have been removed.


An old forgotten photo on a laptop hard drive. I already know for 100% certain that this photo has been manipulated to a great extent.
But to find what I found today makes me furious. This is the first time I have ran across metadata like this and it even tells you the version of metadata editing software that was used.
What Forrest has done, is to cover up when this photo was taken by manipulating the date it was taken. It didn't come from an old laptop hard-drive.
I have 30 or 40 photo files where Forrest uses his camera and then immediately plugs it in to his computer and places it into photoshop. I can show these if you are interested.
Forrest used Photo meta edit 2.1.7 to make the date 1887. It is obvious by the time it was put on the computer that it was 4 minutes later. This was a huge attempt to cover up the date.
Why????????????? I truly hate to find proof like this of deceit, but this is exactly what you are viewing. This is not looking good at all as far as: Was the chest really out in the wilderness! As much investigating as I do on Forrest Fenn, this is my saddest day ever! I have literally found over 50 things today thru metadata that makes this day dreary. I wish it wasn't raining, I'd be working and would of never came across all of this.

Add-on
Above in blue highlights is the metadata editor 2.1.7, that changed the date to 1887. There is a date for this metadata editor 2.1.7 and it is below.

The above metadata editor has the available date of, 2015-12-20 (12/20/2015) this is the last update until 10 days after Forrest used the metadata editor, then a new editor was born of 2.1.8. This supports the time when the photo was taken of 10/2/2016. There are now three dates that add up to the time the photo was taken and this alone is enough evidence to say it is a fact. A good percentage of people will just ignore this fact, like it doesn't hold enough credence. In time, this will be at the top of the documentation.

[Blazingwaddles]

The ICC profile date/time of 1998-02-09 is for Adobe RGB which means the image was edited, among potentially other things, to change the color space from the camera's native sRGB.

So this brings up the modify time of 11:09:06 which is suggested as being less than 4 minutes after the picture actually being taken of 11:05:39. So, the picture was taken, the card read into the computer, the photo image opened and edited in Photoshop. All in less than 4 minutes? Right.........

Much more likely is that the picture was actually taken at a totally unknowable date and time. After being edited in Photoshop, the Metadata was edited at 11:05:39 to remove the original date and time (by OP's admission this was done all the time) and the file was then saved for the last time 3 minutes 27 seconds later at 11:09:06.

[OH!!]

The ICC profile date/time of 1998-02-09 is for Adobe RGB which means the image was edited, among potentially other things, to change the color space from the camera's native sRGB.

So this brings up the modify time of 11:09:06 which is suggested as being less than 4 minutes after the picture actually being taken of 11:05:39. So, the picture was taken, the card read into the computer, the photo image opened and edited in Photoshop. All in less than 4 minutes? Right.........

Much more likely is that the picture was actually taken at a totally unknowable date and time. After being edited in Photoshop, the Metadata was edited at 11:05:39 to remove the original date and time (by OP's admission this was done all the time) and the file was then saved for the last time 3 minutes 27 seconds later at 11:09:06.

The ICC profile belongs to Forrest Fenn's computer monitor. ICC is not only Adobe. Photoshop cannot change EXIF. They are two totally separate formats EXIF is CAMERA ONLY, PERIOD.
You are entwining the two when they cannot entwine. Although the 4 number hex codes, hidden in the photo reveals photoshop, no photoshop application is present.

Here is Forrest's HP computer monitor. This monitor also uses a cathode ray tube display. It is an oldy. It is not a laptop. Note the date.

• Hex

ICC Profile Details

Showing 3 items

ICC Chunk Id	1
Number of ICC Chunks	1
Chunks Size	3,144 bytes

ICC Profile Header

Showing 18 items

profileSize	3,144
preferedCmmType	[ Signature: Lino; Name: Linotronic ]
profileVersion	2.1.0
profileDeviceClass	[ Signature: mntr; Name: Display device profile ]
colourSpace	RGB
pcs	XYZ
dateTime	1998-02-09 06:49:00
profileFileSignature	acsp
primaryPlatformSignature	[ Signature: MSFT; Name: Microsoft Corporation ]
profileFlags	[ 0, 0, 0, 0 ]
deviceManufacturer	[ Signature: IEC; Name: Unknown ]
deviceModel	sRGB
deviceAttributes	[ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 ]
renderingIntent	[ 0, 0, 0, 0 ]
pcsIlluminant	[ X: 1; Y: 1; Z: 1 ]
profileCreator	[ Signature: HP; Name: Unknown ]
profileId	0
reservedBytes	28 bytes reserved

ICC Profile Tags

Showing 17 items

copyrightTag (cprt)	Copyright (c) 1998 Hewlett-Packard Company
profileDescriptionTag (desc)	".sRGB.IEC61966 -2.1............" : 12 73 52 47 42 20 49 45 43 36 31 39 36 36 2D 32 2E 31 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 12h ... [limited to 30 bytes, 17 bytes has been truncated]
mediaWhitePointTag (wtpt)	[ X: 0; Y: 1; Z: 1 ]
Unknown (bkpt)	[ X: 0; Y: 0; Z: 0 ]
redMatrixColumnTag (rXYZ)	[ X: 0; Y: 0; Z: 0 ]
greenMatrixColumnTag (gXYZ)	[ X: 0; Y: 0; Z: 1 ]
blueMatrixColumnTag (bXYZ)	[ X: 0; Y: 0; Z: 0 ]
deviceMfgDescTag (dmnd)	".IEC.http://ww w.iec.ch........" : 16 49 45 43 20 68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 77 77 77 2E 69 65 63 2E 63 68 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00h ... [limited to 30 bytes, 25 bytes has been truncated]
deviceModelDescTag (dmdd)	".IEC.61966-2.1 .Default.RGB.col" : 2E 49 45 43 20 36 31 39 36 36 2D 32 2E 31 20 44 65 66 61 75 6C 74 20 52 47 42 20 63 6F 6Ch ... [limited to 30 bytes, 73 bytes has been truncated]
viewingCondDescTag (vued)	",Reference.Vie wing.Condition.i" : 2C 52 65 66 65 72 65 6E 63 65 20 56 69 65 77 69 6E 67 20 43 6F 6E 64 69 74 69 6F 6E 20 69h ... [limited to 30 bytes, 69 bytes has been truncated]
viewingConditionsTag (view)	28 bytes of 'view' type data
luminanceTag (lumi)	[ X: 0; Y: 76; Z: 80 ]
measurementTag (meas)	28 bytes of 'meas' type data
technologyTag (tech)	4 bytes of 'sig' type data
redTRCTag (rTRC)	2,052 bytes of 'curv' type data
greenTRCTag (gTRC)	2,052 bytes of 'curv' type data
blueTRCTag (bTRC)	2,052 bytes of 'curv' type data

-------------------------------------------


This is the software that changed the dates and why it reads CONCERN. Below red: Camera/Device Information Concerns
The Photo Meta Edit 2.1.7 is the EXIF software that changes date and times. This program was purposely used to change the date and times.

Camera / Device Information Concerns

Your camera / device information has been exposed. Based upon this it may be possible to determine what device was used to make the photo and it's owner. This may be a serious privacy concern depending on the information exposed.

Fix It

EXIF : Software	Photo Meta Edit 2.1.7
ICC : deviceManufacturer	[ Signature: IEC; Name: Unknown ]
ICC : deviceModel	sRGB
ICC : deviceModelDescTag (dmdd)	".IEC.61966-2.1 .Default.RGB.col" : 2E 49 45 43 20 36 31 39 36 36 2D 32 2E 31 20 44 65 66 61 75 6C 74 20 52 47 42 20 63 6F 6Ch ... [limited to 30 bytes, 73 bytes has been truncated]

,,,--------------------------------------------

Put yourself in Forrest Fenn's shoes for a moment. He pulls an old photo from a laptop and wants to share it. If he were honest, there would be NO looking into the metadata, because there is absolutely no reason to, because he honestly pulled it from an old laptop. But if he wasn't honest and was trying to use tomfoolery, he would be thinking about what else the photo reads before sharing it. There is only one reason you would be concerned about the metadata and that is if you had something to hide. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out, it is just common sense. The metadata reads an old cathode ray tube display computer. Laptops do not have a tube. Photos retain the metadata information, unless otherwise completely removed. And when you put over 300 photos together and build a timeline, that has relating metadata, you have built this timeline and a summary appears. The man had something to hide and this alone is a huge red flag. OH!