Everything But The Blaze -- Madison (Nine Mile Hole)

[Blazingwaddles]

[QUOTE=trueyeti;n462557]

If Forrest had answered that "Brown" is a trout, then you would possibly be onto something, but everywhere that Brown trout appear would now be on the table, not just 9MH. Didn't Forrest issue new guidance after the deaths of our fellow searchers? Didn't he say something like no river?

BINGO!!!! WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER. He in fact did NOT say that despite more than one searcher perishing in a river. He said not the Rio Grande because that is the desert not mountains. This is 100% FACT that you indeed need to cross a river. If you didn't have to, FF would have been an absolute reckless asshole not to rule out a river crossing. So yes you had to cross a river. 200%. I'm sorry if you can't see that, it means you are beyond help.

[trueyeti]

[QUOTE=Vertigo;n281620]Not far, but too far to walk. (Driving will be most practical.)
.
Put in below the home of Brown. (Wade into the Madison River below an epic fishing hole.)
.
Imagine if "Brown" was not capitalized. In that case, "Put in below the home of brown" could mean, "Put in below the brown colored home." Clearly, Forrest did not want to steer us that way. Brown was capitalized to preclude that interpretation.
.
Brown must be the name of something in nature. It could pertain to geology, hydrology, flora, or fauna. Between Madison Junction and the West Entrance to Yellowstone, there aren't any obvious features named Brown for each of the first three categories.
.
However, the area is renowned as the habitat for an aptly named animal species: brown trout. The species is known simply as "brown" in the vernacular of bona-fide anglers. Forrest was an avid angler, to put it mildly, so it's natural for him to use this casual parlance.
.
The home of Brown must be a storied fishing hole somewhere on this stretch of the Madison River. If we can locate it precisely with the help of subsequent clues, we'll know where to put in, or wade into, the Madison River.
.

Hey V,
You wrote:
"Imagine if "Brown" was not capitalized. In that case, "Put in below the home of brown" could mean, "Put in below the brown colored home." Clearly, Forrest did not want to steer us that way. Brown was capitalized to preclude that interpretation."
I write:
Imagine that "Brown" is capitalized. In that case, your logic precludes you being steered away from a brown trout.

You wrote:
"Brown must be the name of something in nature. It could pertain to geology, hydrology, flora, or fauna. Between Madison Junction and the West Entrance to Yellowstone, there aren't any obvious features named Brown for each of the first three categories."
I write:
"Must and could," would and should...corroborate your first assumption that "Brown" is a trout (brown).

You wrote:
"However, the area is renowned as the habitat for an aptly named animal species: brown trout. The species is known simply as "brown" in the vernacular of bona-fide anglers. Forrest was an avid angler, to put it mildly, so it's natural for him to use this casual parlance."
I write:
A casual parlance to brown (trout), from "Brown," is no casual parlance because the capitalized "B" makes "Brown" exempt from a casual parlance. It is "proper," and like a "contract." The capitalization makes principal.....the function and meaning indented by the capital "B" in the word "Brown." A small "b's" intention changes the principal and the function and the meaning into something else entirely.....meaning that if ignored by rationalizations.....defeats the principal intention of the capitalization of the word choice of "Brown." Why not a color then......instead of a fish? Don't you think that it is fishy to employ a casual parlance of such an important aspect of the poem?

Remember what Forrest answered to Joan Lunden when she asked him about Brown....he said, "If I told you that, it would lead you straight to the treasure chest."

If Forrest had answered that "Brown" is a trout, then you would possibly be onto something, but everywhere that Brown trout appear would now be on the table, not just 9MH. Didn't Forrest issue new guidance after the deaths of our fellow searchers? Didn't he say something like no river?

You wrote:
"The home of Brown must be a storied fishing hole somewhere on this stretch of the Madison River. If we can locate it precisely with the help of subsequent clues, we'll know where to put in, or wade into, the Madison River."
I write:
You wrote the words, "Imagine, must and could" in this section. Now you're saying "If we can locate the home of Brown," through using the parlance of "brown" from "Brown," which is mightily on shaky ground, as already mentioned above.

PS. If the answer to a question asked, say for example, "What color is your home?" is the color "brown," then the answer would be given as a single word "Brown." In the poem, it is written....not as an answer to a question as a single word, rather it is an important sentence that makes "Brown" the noun where the "Put in below" is a verb. It is a sentence of instruction. Brown, IMO is the most important....and the first clue.

Brown; if a "brown trout" lives in the water, then the instruction portion of the sentence indicates that the searcher is to go underwater, as in...... "put in below" the home of a fish. Hey, it is as likely an interpretation.....the home of brown is the water....therefor the chest....or whatever..... is under the water. Don't you think that if your interpretation of "Brown" is brown trout.....then he would have written, "Put in below the home of browns?"

Hey, how many fish did you catch today? The answer, "eight." What kind of trout are they? The answer, "Browns."
Isn't the common name for "browns," "German brown trout?" Can you "Imagine, must, and could" anything with the "German" part of your parlance? If you can, then perhaps we should tag you "Sir, Parlance Alot".....or.....not.

Cheers.

[Sherif Billy]

Great question Mr. Sherif Billy. Furthermore , has Mr. Old Pilot ever responded to your queries regarding the writings/carvings in the tree? Because ,I went to my spot yesterday and in the same camping spot I always camp AND found the hatchet with Mr. Marvin Fenn's initials , on a tree was spray painted in white " A heart R 2022 . I even found the can that was used . I brought the can back home in the hopes I can lift some fingerprints for later. (hee, hee) Do these initials mean anything to you ? Or Mr. Old Pilot would mean anything to you ? Thanks gentlemen ....

Interesting... But unfortunately they don't mean anything to me....I'll think about it some more...
1f Billy

[Fenndery]

So OP... How then will you, (or we) know the exact spot if the trove is no longer there?
1f Billy

Great question Mr. Sherif Billy. Furthermore , has Mr. Old Pilot ever responded to your queries regarding the writings/carvings in the tree? Because ,I went to my spot yesterday and in the same camping spot I always camp AND found the hatchet with Mr. Marvin Fenn's initials , on a tree was spray painted in white " A heart R 2022 . I even found the can that was used . I brought the can back home in the hopes I can lift some fingerprints for later. (hee, hee) Do these initials mean anything to you ? Or Mr. Old Pilot would mean anything to you ? Thanks gentlemen ....

[Sherif Billy]

Nope. I don't promise that I'll retrieve the treasure chest. It appears that it's already been retrieved. But here's a small tidbit for you: My searching location involved a hike that was generally uphill from where I parked my sedan. The hike was about 2 miles one-way, following the directions given by the poem. Taking a bit of a short cut, more like one mile (but steeper).

So OP... How then will you, (or we) know the exact spot if the trove is no longer there?
1f Billy

[Crazy Midwesterner]

"The clues did not exist when I was a kid but most of the places the clues refer to did." -f
So was it Madison Junction, Madison River, the boulder area, or the log area? Which one of these didn't exist when Fenn was a kid?

"most" can mean "greatest in amount, quantity, or degree." AFAIK "most" in this context can mean "all."

But, assuming the blaze is a mark on a tree that Forrest himself made when hiding the treasure (or a tree that has been struck by lightning), Forrest wouldn't be wrong by saying "most of the places the clues refer to did."

If you want to buy into the theory that the old (now dry) crystalline pond plays into the solve even though it no longer exists, Forrest wouldn't be wrong by saying "most of the places the clues refer to did."

P.S. I'm popping on here to check out all the new developments. I'm finding it amusing how similar the arguments about the treasure have been for roughly the past two years. Without anything definitive from Jack or the Fenn estate, I expect everyone to continue arguing in circles with one another.

[Not4but242Walk]

"The clues did not exist when I was a kid but most of the places the clues refer to did." -f

So was it Madison Junction, Madison River, the boulder area, or the log area? Which one of these didn't exist when Fenn was a kid?

[wwwamericana]

I don't understand when I see a solution like this. Forrest said, don't go where an 80-year-old man could not go. He also said, who ever solved it, would have to earn it. It is clear the earning is in the solution, not running around all other the place. So the solution is not going to be some easy solve. How could someone earn it, if it is easy to get to, and simple to solve ?

Forrest himself said it was easy to get to and simple to solve if you start in the right place, so you tell me about "earning" it. Perhaps it had more to do with an honest day's wages and daily bread.....

[wwwamericana]

This is proof how far people will go to make a solution work. It is not the location, and that is a fact. Just by taking things Forrest said, it disqualifies it. You CAN'T pick and choose when Forrest was telling the truth or when he was lying. You treat one statement of his as law, the next gets tossed on Time. If the chest was anywhere them fishing logs takes someone, Forrest gave secret hints. He told a searcher to look for artifacts there as well, so he cheated. He gave numbers of people who figured out the first two clues, that does not match either. No one would happen on that chest, really, in Yellowstone in that area. When and if you see the real solution, it will match all the things Forrest said, along with the time it took him to create it. All this hard work and research talked about in this thread is, a fishing hole, and a picture in TTOTC. This not the solution to the Forrest Fenn TTOTC. I know you have convinced yourselves, just like many with their solves. You added the email from Odious soul, and some data from someone you think is smart enough to solve the poem. But so dumb, he is going to post it for the world to see. By using all this information, you are saying Forrest lied about the ending, Jack lied about the ending, but your research and picture book solution is correct. I love to tell you, Forrest Fenn, was close to a genus if not one. This solution is not even close to the imagination and IQ level of Forrest Fenn. By the way, Forrest never said the man in the pickup truck could solve his poem. He said that was the target for his book.

He offered Hope.....

[Must Listengood]

Vertigo That's amazing.

[Vertigo]

Top is an oil painting. Bottom is a photo from the same perspective, looking up the Madison river from just below 9MH.

And here it is in 1906. The nearest boulder (on the right side in the images above) is out of frame.

[CRM114]

No. This solve starts at the end of the Firehole River/Madison Junction. It would not work with the Caldera or CD. The correct starting point is essential to following the path to the blaze. You might want to re-read the solution on page 1.

Reread quickly. It has no dependence on starting location whatsoever other than wwwh should be "up" from Madison Canyon. The CD works fine for me. Zapster likes the Caldera boundary. We all end up in same Madison canyon and duplicate from there.

[thehomeofBrown.com]

But in the NMH solution, just throw "yellowstone Caldera", "Madison Junction," "Firehole" and "Continental Divide" in a hat and randomly pick one. There's your wwwh. It doesn't matter which one it is, unless you're trying to make every Forrest quote work. You still end up at NMH. You could have the wrong one according to Forrest. NMH assumes Forrest messed up really badly.

No. This solve starts at the end of the Firehole River/Madison Junction. It would not work with the Caldera or CD. The correct starting point is essential to following the path to the blaze. You might want to re-read the solution on page 1.

[Lady V]

There’s also more than one path to the 9MH solve. Disqualifying, IMO.

[CRM114]

But Madison Junction is not contiguous with Madison Canyon. That's why I still say the Yellowstone Caldera boundary (where it crosses the Madison) is a better WWWH if one is trying to force-fit 9MH.

But the fact that a clear, unambiguous, universally searcher-agreed WWWH cannot be determined if you start at 9MH and work backwards tells me something is amiss. It would also conflict with a Q&A where Forrest said you could do just that: reverse engineer WWWH from (I believe) home of Brown.

You and I are the only ones that see this, it appears. Add that Forrest said if you don't have WWWH, you don't have anything.

But in the NMH solution, just throw "yellowstone Caldera", "Madison Junction," "Firehole" and "Continental Divide" in a hat and randomly pick one. There's your wwwh. It doesn't matter which one it is, unless you're trying to make every Forrest quote work. You still end up at NMH. You could have the wrong one according to Forrest. NMH assumes Forrest messed up really badly.