What the blaze could never be

[93cruiser]

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?

[93cruiser]

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.

[Not4but242Walk]

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?

_

[93cruiser]

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.

[Not4but242Walk]

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

[steve66]

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.

[pws111]

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.

[steve66]

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.

[jan_v60]

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.

[93cruiser]

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?

[blackjack21]

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 blaze is a lily.

[In My Opinion]

I came up in a family of timber men. I am 60 but my grandfather and dad always called a blaze a mark on a horses face or blazing a tree to mark property lines. I always thought Fenns blaze was the latter and thought the treasure would be on a border. Obviously I was wrong now but thats the only things I knew the old timers refer to as a blaze.

[wwwamericana]

When I think about a "blaze,"
the first thing that comes to mind is "a blaze of lightening."
Finding the strike zone might prove difficult.
Sorry gotta run - getting my hair done -
adding just a few highlights.....

[Sunburnt1]

I take the blaze as being circular. Maybe Thats' why he used the term radial.. if the blazed object doesn't face any direction. And it would be obvious when you seen it.
another thought which that quote. ( I Didn't take a radial off of the blaze) is he did not remove the VOR from the plane he crashed in the Rockies. I still haven't heard anyone say where those 2 crashes were. And if the planes were recovered. I could not find them in any reports. And he only mentioned those 2 slip ups once in last 6 questions .

[crow]

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?

What do you think about this quote? It seems to contradict part of what you are saying.

"While it’s not impossible to remove the blaze it isn’t feasible to try, and I am certain it’s still there. "
~ Forrest Fenn