Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What the blaze could never be

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

  • What the blaze could never be

    If someone wants to know the blaze, one should start with known facts.
    1. Not a rock or boulder. Either are not really damagable without dynamite.
    2. Jack said he looked up and saw the damaged blaze. This rules out anything visible on ground level. Most things are on the ground you know. Now what?

    Forrest did say after you find the blaze look quickly down and it will all cease basically. The blaze was above the treasure, somehow in the trees. What else is up?

    Forrest also stated he did something to dal, and didn't want his blaze confused with others and what he did. So Forrest placed something up in a tree, or manipulated nature such as tree limbs, possibly tied together or something,to become a blaze in my opinion.

    Comments?

  • #2
    Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
    If someone wants to know the blaze, one should start with known facts.
    1. Not a rock or boulder. Either are not really damagable without dynamite.
    2. Jack said he looked up and saw the damaged blaze. This rules out anything visible on ground level. Most things are on the ground you know. Now what?

    Forrest did say after you find the blaze look quickly down and it will all cease basically. The blaze was above the treasure, somehow in the trees. What else is up?

    Forrest also stated he did something to dal, and didn't want his blaze confused with others and what he did. So Forrest placed something up in a tree, or manipulated nature such as tree limbs, possibly tied together or something,to become a blaze in my opinion.

    Comments?
    I don't think Jack would deliberately try to help anyone solve the poem, but maybe he did get a little careless, when talking about a damaged blaze. And I don't
    really believe him. But applying "a little imagination" (as Forrest seemed to suggest we should do), here's what I came up with:
    If Jack was careless, and saw something that he thought was the blaze, and after 25 search trips was able to stumble upon the hidey spot by luckily seeing this thing for the first time . . . I imagine that here's one way this might have developed. Maybe what he saw was a broken rock that reflected sunlight, perhaps causing a bright ray of light to shine back at him -- perhaps from inside a distant tumbleweed on the ground. In other words, maybe the rock functions as a blaze only because it's broken. And Jack, after dozens of attempts, finally managed to be at the right place at the right time, and see this little glimpse of brightness? I realize this is far-fetched, but stranger things (also far-fetched) have happened. Have you ever read about the woman that survived being hit on the shoulder by a small meteorite?
    Last edited by Old Pilot; 11-15-2021, 09:28 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Old Pilot View Post

      I don't think Jack would deliberately try to help anyone solve the poem, but maybe he did get a little careless, when talking about a damaged blaze. And I don't
      really believe him. But applying "a little imagination" (as Forrest seemed to suggest we should do), here's what I came up with:
      If Jack was careless, and saw something that he thought was the blaze, and after 25 search trips was able to stumble upon the hidey spot by luckily seeing this thing for the first time . . . I imagine that here's one way this might have developed. Maybe what he saw was a broken rock that reflected sunlight, perhaps causing a bright ray of light to shine back at him -- perhaps from inside a distant tumbleweed on the ground. In other words, maybe the rock functions as a blaze only because it's broken. And Jack, after dozens of attempts, finally managed to be at the right place at the right time, and see this little glimpse of brightness? I realize this is far-fetched, but stranger things (also far-fetched) have happened. Have you ever read about the woman that survived being hit on the shoulder by a small meteorite?
      No, sorry. Not impossible, but not realistic. Jack looked up, then down. He was right there and had no idea until he saw the damaged blaze above him. If he didn't view the damaged blaze he would have left. He was literally on it and didn't know is the way the story was told. Hence 25 searches or whatever it was.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
        Jack said he looked up and saw the damaged blaze. This rules out anything visible on ground level. Most things are on the ground you know. Now what?

        Forrest did say after you find the blaze look quickly down and it will all cease basically. The blaze was above the treasure, somehow in the trees. What else is up?
        Click image for larger version

Name:	PSX_20211115_210707.jpg
Views:	433
Size:	89.1 KB
ID:	356511
        Click image for larger version

Name:	PSX_20211115_212101.jpg
Views:	323
Size:	127.5 KB
ID:	356512
        _

        Comment


        • #5
          No. That wreck can be seen from many areas. That's not it.
          jack literally was walking on the treasure and didn't know it. The blaze was right above the treasure as in feet away directly up.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
            No. That wreck can be seen from many areas. That's not it.
            jack literally was walking on the treasure and didn't know it. The blaze was right above the treasure as in feet away directly up.
            In my opinion, reverse the order of blaze and treasure in that last thought. You could be on to something, except the Jack part.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
              No. That wreck can be seen from many areas. That's not it.
              jack literally was walking on the treasure and didn't know it. The blaze was right above the treasure as in feet away directly up.
              All 9 clues can be seen from many areas, but one must follow them in order to find the correct vantage point. Nothing that Forrest or Jack wrote suggests that the blaze was in very close proximity to the chest.


              MW Featured Question April 2016

              Mr. Fenn, Which direction does the Blaze face? North, South, East or West? Curious. Foxy

              I didn’t take a radial off of the blaze Foxy. I’m thinking it may not be any of those directions. f

              MW Featured Question May 2016

              Mr. Fenn: How far is the chest located from the blaze? ~ casey

              Casey, I did not take the measurement, but logic tells me that if you don’t know where the blaze is it really doesn’t matter. If you can find the blaze though, the answer to your question will be obvious. Does that help?f

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
                2. Jack said he looked up and saw the damaged blaze. This rules out anything visible on ground level. Most things are on the ground you know. Now what?
                I do not agree that something on the ground is ruled out. Jack may have been looking UP to something on the ground, see pic. Jack was looking UP first, and then Jack was looking DOWN.
                Click image for larger version

Name:	up-down.png
Views:	277
Size:	562.7 KB
ID:	356632

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
                  If someone wants to know the blaze, one should start with known facts.
                  1. Not a rock or boulder. Either are not really damagable without dynamite.
                  2. Jack said he looked up and saw the damaged blaze. This rules out anything visible on ground level. Most things are on the ground you know. Now what?

                  Forrest did say after you find the blaze look quickly down and it will all cease basically. The blaze was above the treasure, somehow in the trees. What else is up?

                  Forrest also stated he did something to dal, and didn't want his blaze confused with others and what he did. So Forrest placed something up in a tree, or manipulated nature such as tree limbs, possibly tied together or something,to become a blaze in my opinion.

                  Comments?
                  The fallacy of your argument is relying on anything Jack the Quack ever said. He is a liar and did not find the chest. So, your entire analysis is pointless and wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post
                    1. Not a rock or boulder. Either are not really damagable without dynamite.
                    If "a rock" means "one rock" - Yes.
                    But, if there are multiple rocks/stones (photo taken by Diggin Gypsy), it could be something that can be damaged by animals or the elements.
                    Click image for larger version

Name:	blazeDGypsy.jpg
Views:	266
Size:	77.4 KB
ID:	356642

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by 93cruiser View Post

                      No, sorry. Not impossible, but not realistic. Jack looked up, then down. He was right there and had no idea until he saw the damaged blaze above him. If he didn't view the damaged blaze he would have left. He was literally on it and didn't know is the way the story was told. Hence 25 searches or whatever it was.
                      And you believe his story? I don't.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by steve66 View Post
                        If "a rock" means "one rock" - Yes.
                        But, if there are multiple rocks/stones (photo taken by Diggin Gypsy), it could be something that can be damaged by animals or the elements.
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	blazeDGypsy.jpg
Views:	266
Size:	77.4 KB
ID:	356642
                        I agree that a pile of stones (such as a cairn) could be "damaged", simply by moving the stones. But I don't think that Forrest would rely on such a vulnerable thing to function as the blaze.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Not4but242Walk View Post

                          All 9 clues can be seen from many areas, but one must follow them in order to find the correct vantage point. Nothing that Forrest or Jack wrote suggests that the blaze was in very close proximity to the chest.
                          . . .
                          I believe that each of the locations/items that are referred to by the clues can be seen from many areas. And I believe that Forrest's intent was that the blaze would first be found by someone located pretty precisely, who had a correct solve of a few clues of the poem. Difficult, yes, but not very complicated. This is why I think that a teenager could help in solving the poem.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Old Pilot View Post

                            I agree that a pile of stones (such as a cairn) could be "damaged", simply by moving the stones. But I don't think that Forrest would rely on such a vulnerable thing to function as the blaze.
                            Some stone piles can be “monumental” and not easy to damage.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Not4but242Walk View Post

                              All 9 clues can be seen from many areas, but one must follow them in order to find the correct vantage point. Nothing that Forrest or Jack wrote suggests that the blaze was in very close proximity to the chest.


                              MW Featured Question April 2016

                              Mr. Fenn, Which direction does the Blaze face? North, South, East or West? Curious. Foxy

                              I didn’t take a radial off of the blaze Foxy. I’m thinking it may not be any of those directions. f

                              MW Featured Question May 2016

                              Mr. Fenn: How far is the chest located from the blaze? ~ casey

                              Casey, I did not take the measurement, but logic tells me that if you don’t know where the blaze is it really doesn’t matter. If you can find the blaze though, the answer to your question will be obvious. Does that help?f
                              what you posted in bold proves my point. If you can find the blaze it's obvious forrest stated.. you are standing on the chest at the point of looking up and seeing the blaze. Sorry, the poem tells you this. Look quickly down after eying the blaze, which is up. What is in question here?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X