Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IS IT POSSIBLE that the blaze was ALWAYS broken?

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

  • IS IT POSSIBLE that the blaze was ALWAYS broken?

    Do you think the blaze could have been broken from the very start or did it break in time?

    *correction* DAMAGED

    Jack stated the blaze was damaged, my question is, do you think it’s possible the blaze was always damaged since Forrest hid the chest?
    Last edited by Superserioussearcher; 06-09-2021, 03:46 PM.

  • #2
    While DAMAGED can mean broken, I prefer considering things based on the words Jack used, and that is damaged.
    To be right for someone, you have to be willing to be wrong for someone else.

    Comment


    • #3
      Where do you get that the blaze was ever broken?
      You can't break a two-ton piece of rock.

      Comment


      • #4
        Not always. It wasn't yet 'damaged' when it left Pendleton, Oregon. It has however, been in a damaged state since around June 28, 1943.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Superserioussearcher View Post
          Do you think the blaze could have been broken from the very start or did it break in time?

          *correction* DAMAGED

          Jack stated the blaze was damaged, my question is, do you think it’s possible the blaze was always damaged since Forrest hid the chest?
          I think their are many ways for the blaze to have always been damaged.
          Lately I believe construction is why it is damaged.
          Obviously my blaze is a wad of map sections. A ball of klews knotted together with squares looking for a post. A flag on the calendar. Thus you can't damage it or create a fake one by tying a ribbon, or nailing a dog to a tree after searching. But Forrest can nail a post to a shell in my thoughts.
          But a 590sn can sure dig up some heavy loads and rearrange the brave and in the wood.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Fullpress View Post

            I think their are many ways for the blaze to have always been damaged.
            Lately I believe construction is why it is damaged.
            Obviously my blaze is a wad of map sections. A ball of klews knotted together with squares looking for a post. A flag on the calendar. Thus you can't damage it or create a fake one by tying a ribbon, or nailing a dog to a tree after searching. But Forrest can nail a post to a shell in my thoughts.
            But a 590sn can sure dig up some heavy loads and rearrange the brave and in the wood.
            A backhoe hasn't recently done any digging within 15 feet of the blaze, in my opinion. I said "backhoe", not "back door".

            Comment


            • #7
              Is the blaze always damaged if the blaze was a tree struck by lightning?

              Comment


              • #8
                Whatever it was or when... isn't it a great excuse for all of us for not finding the treasure? :-)
                „It‘s almost impossible to carry the torch of truth through a crowd without singeing somebody‘s beard.“
                G. C. Lichtenberg

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cowboyrocker View Post
                  Whatever it was or when... isn't it a great excuse for all of us for not finding the treasure? :-)
                  It's not a great excuse for me; I never believed that Forrest would choose something fragile to be the blaze in his poem.
                  Last edited by Old Pilot; 06-12-2021, 12:15 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not many physical things could have always been broken, but I suppose a pie coming from the oven can.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Woohoo. I like hot pie.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	14E69F64-3E9E-445C-B6CD-751F3324C185.png
Views:	143
Size:	396.8 KB
ID:	302509

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Superserioussearcher View Post
                          Do you think the blaze could have been broken from the very start or did it break in time?

                          *correction* DAMAGED

                          Jack stated the blaze was damaged, my question is, do you think it’s possible the blaze was always damaged since Forrest hid the chest?
                          Jack lied. The blaze has never been damaged and is still perfectly intact and in the exact same state that Forrest wanted us to find it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Superserioussearcher View Post
                            Do you think the blaze could have been broken from the very start or did it break in time?
                            No, I think the blaze was damaged during the first 10 years. But despite the damage, the Blaze will last for over 1000 years.

                            Imagine on the bottom of a dry creek there are quite a lot of noticeably bright stones. Some sort a kind of a blaze made up of many individual stones arranged by nature. Not feasible to remove them all, too many bright stones, they will surely be recognizable in this place for a thousand years.

                            And imagine Forrest Fenn has formed a blaze, a kind of pyramid, out of some stones there.

                            When Forrest spoke of the blaze, he spoke synonymously of the large number of bright stones scattered allong the creek, as well as the small pyramid. For the former, Forrest expected to last hundreds of years; for the latter, Forrest expected to decay in years or decades.

                            The early searches had the advantage of the small pyramid. Searches in a thousand years would have had the task of reading the entirety of all the bright stones as the blaze and search a larger area to find the nook. That would be more difficult, but not impossible.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              In response to the thread title, "NO".

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X