Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Implication: Nothing is as it seems

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

  • Implication: Nothing is as it seems

    If Forrest really emailed that to Mike's buddy after the Wyoming "revelation," then there are really only a few things it can mean.

    1. The chest was not found.
    2. The chest was not found in Wyoming.

    Because we had no mention of Jack at that point, we would need to apply it forward in time for it to imply that Jack is not the finder. We could do that too, but at the moment F emailed that statement to whoever... those two are really the only things that aren't as they seem.

    It seems illogical, but possible--given Dal's emails from F--that the chest was not found.

    But to contextualize the statement "nothing is as it seems" in relation to a wager on which state the treasure would be found in... the chest was not found in Wyoming.

    If the chest had been found in Wyoming, then Forrest making that statement would be lying to Mike's buddy, because everything would be exactly as it seems. Literally, the only thing we had to go on in terms of anything at that point in time was that it was found in Wyoming. If that is not what it seems, it was either not found or not found in Wyoming.

    Thus dies the Nine Mile Hole partial solve.

    If we apply the implication forward in time to Jack revealing himself as the finder, then Jack is also not what he seems. Since Jack only sort of seems like the finder, he is thus not the finder. He has provided zero evidence to prove himself the finder. Photos with Forrest and the treasure chest are not evidence of anything except that he was in a room with Forrest and the treasure chest. We have no picture of Jack holding the treasure. No picture of Jack upon discovering it. No picture of Jack in possession of the treasure at all. We do have a picture of an empty IKEA bag, so there's that. But then again, we have no picture of Jack in possession of the IKEA bag. That could be anyone's IKEA bag on the floor. We literally have zero evidence of Jack having found anything. We have no statement from Forrest that Jack found it. The statement from the family was quickly withdrawn, the one where Shiloh sort of confirmed Jack as the finder.

    Next, we have a story from Jack that Forrest introduced him to his family as "Bill." But now it surfaces that Jack did not go to Forrest's house after all. This is interesting because the story I wanted to hear from the finder would be about drinking the champagne that Forrest had for the finder in his fridge for ten years. Or the story about drinking some brandy from Jackie-O's bottle. Those are both stories that would be interesting to hear.

    Instead, Jack sat in a hotel in Santa Fe for a few days before meeting in a lawyer's office and being photographed not in possession of the chest but at a table with Forrest and both men appearing cagey. There's no picture with Forrest's arm around Jack and both men touching the treasure chest. There's no picture of Jack at the table holding the treasure chest in any sort of ownership way. If there is, we have not seen that photograph.

    So, I'm done believing that Jack is the finder. If he's the finder, I'm sure he could have furnished some sort of paperwork settling the issue 100 percent. Instead, we have no solution, and most likely no finder, until such time that a statement from Forrest is issued naming Jack the finder I am not sure what he really is, other than someone named Jack who was photographed with Forrest in an attorney's office. That is all that has been proven.

    I think Forrest did go to great lengths to protect an actual finder. And I think Jack is part of those great lengths to protect the actual finder/solver person. Had Jack been the solver, we would have had a solution by now. The actual solution is someone else's solution and not Jack's and not in Wyoming. The existence of Jack and the Wyoming statement are both part of Forrest's going to great lengths to protect the finder. End of story.

    Jack behaves nothing like an actual finder. Jack does not have possession of the chest and likely never did and never will. Even if it is sold, that will not be proof that Jack is the finder. Forrest could have arranged to have his people sell the chest for the actual finder.

  • #2
    Can I get a hallelujah

    Comment


    • #3
      How about an Amen.

      Comment


      • #4
        Oh, it Seems pretty F'd up to me. So maybe Everything is as it seems
        Last edited by Hoof Hearted; 01-06-2022, 09:53 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          JDER You wrote:
          If Forrest really emailed that to Mike's buddy after the Wyoming "revelation," then there are really only a few things it can mean.

          1. The chest was not found.
          2. The chest was not found in Wyoming.

          You should explain this statement. IMO this could also mean that the chest was not found but it still can be found in Wyoming. I don’t understand why you exclude Wyoming, if the chest was not found. Please explain your statement.

          I do not think that “nothing is was it seems” can be taken so literally. If that would be, this would also mean that we can trow away TTOTC, TFTW, OUAW in his bin.
          Last edited by jan_v60; 01-06-2022, 11:04 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JDER View Post
            If Forrest really emailed that to Mike's buddy after the Wyoming "revelation," then there are really only a few things it can mean.

            1. The chest was not found.
            2. The chest was not found in Wyoming.

            Because we had no mention of Jack at that point, we would need to apply it forward in time for it to imply that Jack is not the finder. We could do that too, but at the moment F emailed that statement to whoever... those two are really the only things that aren't as they seem.

            It seems illogical, but possible--given Dal's emails from F--that the chest was not found.

            But to contextualize the statement "nothing is as it seems" in relation to a wager on which state the treasure would be found in... the chest was not found in Wyoming.

            If the chest had been found in Wyoming, then Forrest making that statement would be lying to Mike's buddy, because everything would be exactly as it seems. Literally, the only thing we had to go on in terms of anything at that point in time was that it was found in Wyoming. If that is not what it seems, it was either not found or not found in Wyoming.

            Thus dies the Nine Mile Hole partial solve.
            Or, the chest was found in Wyoming, but not in the state of Wyoming.

            IMO, the chest was found by Jack in Wyoming!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by jan_v60 View Post
              JDER You wrote:
              If Forrest really emailed that to Mike's buddy after the Wyoming "revelation," then there are really only a few things it can mean.

              1. The chest was not found.
              2. The chest was not found in Wyoming.

              You should explain this statement. IMO this could also mean that the chest was not found but it still can be found in Wyoming. I don’t understand why you exclude Wyoming, if the chest was not found. Please explain your statement.

              I do not think that “nothing is was it seems” can be taken so literally. If that would be, this would also mean that we can trow away TTOTC, TFTW, OUAW in his bin.
              Sorry about that. I will try to clarify here.

              June 6, F tells the community that the chest has been found.

              July 22nd(?), F tells the community that the chest was found in Wyoming.

              Allegedly, shortly thereafter Mike's friend emails F regarding a bet he had made on what state it would be found in.

              F replies "nothing is as it seems."

              I am simply taking the two pieces of information that we had at that time, when F allegedly made the statement, and saying these are the two givens (information given to us) that could be not as they seem.

              I can see some scenario where we combine the two givens and come up with a third possibility, but I just wanted to separate what we had been told and examine what "nothing is as it seems" would imply. I hope this makes more sense.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mountain digger
                JDER - just the one thing I didn't agree with but otherwise you nailed it.

                Karl needs to let the searcher community know if he needs the true poem solver to step forward and contact him. Karl needs to provide the method, manner, and way forward to protect that person and his solve without compromising it (the solve). Just sending Karl the solve blindly does not meet that need or this could all have been put under the bed by now. Karl is smart enough to figure out a way forward for the true solver of the poem and the solver can then make the solve public if he so chooses.

                f never personally met this individual even though proof positive of the solve was provided by HIM to f. Was f needing a photo to provide to Karl? this is just one possibility that comes to mind.

                It was strange to read f use the word "deportment" in the email to Dal. I think using it said volumes of many posters here, redd it, and other sites, not just searchers in general. Just some thoughts as I've obviously got no access to true facts. lol

                as I've said before and elsewhere, we need MUCH MORE.
                I would think that F had this all figured out. As it regards the actual solver, I believe that person is known to at least two of the three attorneys. Perhaps not the one representing Jack, as proxy finder. I'm not sure what the hold up is, but it's probably the stupid lawsuits. They seem to have ruined the ending for everyone, or at least seriously post-poned it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JDER View Post

                  I would think that F had this all figured out. As it regards the actual solver, I believe that person is known to at least two of the three attorneys. Perhaps not the one representing Jack, as proxy finder. I'm not sure what the hold up is, but it's probably the stupid lawsuits. They seem to have ruined the ending for everyone, or at least seriously post-poned it.
                  Seriously

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mountain digger
                    JDER - just the one thing I didn't agree with but otherwise you nailed it.

                    Karl needs to let the searcher community know if he needs the true poem solver to step forward and contact him. Karl needs to provide the method, manner, and way forward to protect that person and his solve without compromising it (the solve). Just sending Karl the solve blindly does not meet that need or this could all have been put under the bed by now. Karl is smart enough to figure out a way forward for the true solver of the poem and the solver can then make the solve public if he so chooses.

                    f never personally met this individual even though proof positive of the solve was provided by HIM to f. Was f needing a photo to provide to Karl? this is just one possibility that comes to mind.

                    It was strange to read f use the word "deportment" in the email to Dal. I think using it said volumes of many posters here, redd it, and other sites, not just searchers in general. Just some thoughts as I've obviously got no access to true facts. lol

                    as I've said before and elsewhere, we need MUCH MORE.
                    This sounds like a solvers "signature move".

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Space Hopper View Post

                      This sounds like a solvers "signature move".
                      I think you put the quotes in the wrong place.
                      Should read:
                      This sounds like a "solver's" signature move.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        What amazes me is people hear about some email and believe it, like it is Gospel.
                        They cling to something no one saw other than a guy who does not want to pay a bet.
                        Well golly gee it was a friend of Mikes, if I recall, so was the GPS solve informant.
                        I have seen how people can turn an email from Forrest into want they want to see.
                        The DAL email comes to mind. Forrest's says DO NOT look for any hints in this email.
                        But people grabbed the part that fit their mind set and ran with it.
                        Just like when Forrest told everyone it was found in Wyoming, he then listed the three states it was NOT IN.
                        But we still have people telling us what the definition of Wyoming is, come on, you were wrong.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JDER View Post
                          If Forrest really emailed that to Mike's buddy after the Wyoming "revelation," then there are really only a few things it can mean.

                          1. The chest was not found.
                          2. The chest was not found in Wyoming.

                          Because we had no mention of Jack at that point, we would need to apply it forward in time for it to imply that Jack is not the finder. We could do that too, but at the moment F emailed that statement to whoever... those two are really the only things that aren't as they seem.

                          It seems illogical, but possible--given Dal's emails from F--that the chest was not found.

                          But to contextualize the statement "nothing is as it seems" in relation to a wager on which state the treasure would be found in... the chest was not found in Wyoming.

                          If the chest had been found in Wyoming, then Forrest making that statement would be lying to Mike's buddy, because everything would be exactly as it seems. Literally, the only thing we had to go on in terms of anything at that point in time was that it was found in Wyoming. If that is not what it seems, it was either not found or not found in Wyoming.

                          Thus dies the Nine Mile Hole partial solve.

                          If we apply the implication forward in time to Jack revealing himself as the finder, then Jack is also not what he seems. Since Jack only sort of seems like the finder, he is thus not the finder. He has provided zero evidence to prove himself the finder. Photos with Forrest and the treasure chest are not evidence of anything except that he was in a room with Forrest and the treasure chest. We have no picture of Jack holding the treasure. No picture of Jack upon discovering it. No picture of Jack in possession of the treasure at all. We do have a picture of an empty IKEA bag, so there's that. But then again, we have no picture of Jack in possession of the IKEA bag. That could be anyone's IKEA bag on the floor. We literally have zero evidence of Jack having found anything. We have no statement from Forrest that Jack found it. The statement from the family was quickly withdrawn, the one where Shiloh sort of confirmed Jack as the finder.

                          Next, we have a story from Jack that Forrest introduced him to his family as "Bill." But now it surfaces that Jack did not go to Forrest's house after all. This is interesting because the story I wanted to hear from the finder would be about drinking the champagne that Forrest had for the finder in his fridge for ten years. Or the story about drinking some brandy from Jackie-O's bottle. Those are both stories that would be interesting to hear.

                          Instead, Jack sat in a hotel in Santa Fe for a few days before meeting in a lawyer's office and being photographed not in possession of the chest but at a table with Forrest and both men appearing cagey. There's no picture with Forrest's arm around Jack and both men touching the treasure chest. There's no picture of Jack at the table holding the treasure chest in any sort of ownership way. If there is, we have not seen that photograph.

                          So, I'm done believing that Jack is the finder. If he's the finder, I'm sure he could have furnished some sort of paperwork settling the issue 100 percent. Instead, we have no solution, and most likely no finder, until such time that a statement from Forrest is issued naming Jack the finder I am not sure what he really is, other than someone named Jack who was photographed with Forrest in an attorney's office. That is all that has been proven.

                          I think Forrest did go to great lengths to protect an actual finder. And I think Jack is part of those great lengths to protect the actual finder/solver person. Had Jack been the solver, we would have had a solution by now. The actual solution is someone else's solution and not Jack's and not in Wyoming. The existence of Jack and the Wyoming statement are both part of Forrest's going to great lengths to protect the finder. End of story.

                          Jack behaves nothing like an actual finder. Jack does not have possession of the chest and likely never did and never will. Even if it is sold, that will not be proof that Jack is the finder. Forrest could have arranged to have his people sell the chest for the actual finder.
                          nothing is as it seems because the stories were him pretending to be people he wasn’t and do the things they did. The chest is gone btw, the chase is over.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by JDER View Post

                            I would think that F had this all figured out. As it regards the actual solver, I believe that person is known to at least two of the three attorneys. Perhaps not the one representing Jack, as proxy finder. I'm not sure what the hold up is, but it's probably the stupid lawsuits. They seem to have ruined the ending for everyone, or at least seriously post-poned it.
                            I don't believe that the actual solver is known to any of the attorneys currently, recently, or ever involved with this treasure hunt. I think that the solver is smart enough to avoid legal entanglements.

                            I also believe that there are too many (silly/stupid) generalizations being posted. When someone posts "Nobody knows anything", or something similarly broad, I can't
                            help but think that this person "isn't playing with a full deck". People should be (at least a little) more careful with their postings. I suggest proofreading and editing
                            before hitting "post reply". This isn't rocket science, folks.
                            Last edited by Old Pilot; 01-07-2022, 02:07 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Casper, Sasper, jasper. Razz, taz, Jazz. Pin, jinn, skin.
                              Last edited by Tornado; 01-07-2022, 02:46 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X