Jack on FF's reaction to the damaged blaze:
Jack's Mysterious writings response:
what caught me most about this was it seemed like the blaze was tiny. "It took slow and methodical effort on the ground to find."
and it also seemed like the blaze was an object: The blaze and the treasure were out in the elements
just the way that is worded makes it seem like an object instead of part of the environment. Part of the environment to me would be a mark on a rock, mark on a tree, etc.
Jack on fake blazes. This would be after he encountered the fake blaze:
I think it wasn't a mark on a tree.
Conclusion:
I think it was something like a fishing lure: "Helped by logic, my experience on the ground at the location, and a hint in the book"
it would be logical to use a fishing lure to as the blaze in this fishing area. A mark on a tree would be hard because of the lodge pole trees were very thin. Rocks would be to obvious. And a lure would be tiny which would take "It took slow and methodical effort on the ground to find."
It would also be very poetic and fitting for Forrest Fenn, a fisherman, to lure us with an actual fishing lure. How much did he talk about fishing in his books and interviews?
He thought it was a possibility but was surprised it happened so early in the chase
"Helped by logic, my experience on the ground at the location, and a hint in the book, I figured out what the blaze was in late 2018.
As Forrest said, it’s not the kind of thing you can expect to find on spring break or an afternoon picnic. It took slow and methodical effort on the ground to find. A necessary defense of the blaze was to make it something that could be found, but not so readily obvious, so that in case a human being did happen to go there, they wouldn’t stumble on the treasure.
As I’ve said, I think the blaze is too damaged to be easily “read” as the blaze at this point in time without the treasure still sitting in the nook beneath it. But I don’t think many realize that was part of the design.
The blaze and the treasure were out in the elements, so he left it to fate and nature to decide how difficult the treasure hunt would be at any given point, and as he said, it would get more difficult over time.
Forrest said the things the clues referred to might exist in 100 years. Not may, might. There was doubt there. Fate would decide what happened to the blaze, and we were unlucky that it was damaged relatively early in the search by natural forces.
As Forrest said, it’s not the kind of thing you can expect to find on spring break or an afternoon picnic. It took slow and methodical effort on the ground to find. A necessary defense of the blaze was to make it something that could be found, but not so readily obvious, so that in case a human being did happen to go there, they wouldn’t stumble on the treasure.
As I’ve said, I think the blaze is too damaged to be easily “read” as the blaze at this point in time without the treasure still sitting in the nook beneath it. But I don’t think many realize that was part of the design.
The blaze and the treasure were out in the elements, so he left it to fate and nature to decide how difficult the treasure hunt would be at any given point, and as he said, it would get more difficult over time.
Forrest said the things the clues referred to might exist in 100 years. Not may, might. There was doubt there. Fate would decide what happened to the blaze, and we were unlucky that it was damaged relatively early in the search by natural forces.
and it also seemed like the blaze was an object: The blaze and the treasure were out in the elements
just the way that is worded makes it seem like an object instead of part of the environment. Part of the environment to me would be a mark on a rock, mark on a tree, etc.
Jack on fake blazes. This would be after he encountered the fake blaze:
/r/FindingFennsGold /u/thecondor2 10.1.2019
Beware of fake blazes. I think the "F" on the tree is the most common I've heard of. Probably because of that scrapbook.
Beware of fake blazes. I think the "F" on the tree is the most common I've heard of. Probably because of that scrapbook.
Conclusion:
I think it was something like a fishing lure: "Helped by logic, my experience on the ground at the location, and a hint in the book"
it would be logical to use a fishing lure to as the blaze in this fishing area. A mark on a tree would be hard because of the lodge pole trees were very thin. Rocks would be to obvious. And a lure would be tiny which would take "It took slow and methodical effort on the ground to find."
It would also be very poetic and fitting for Forrest Fenn, a fisherman, to lure us with an actual fishing lure. How much did he talk about fishing in his books and interviews?
Comment