Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Where warm waters halt: your inescapable conclusion...

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by klein View Post
    I believe the poem can be solved.
    I agree. But I don't think he revealed the whole truth about his intentions, his methods or the find. If it was all so clear and cut and dried we wouldn't still be here wondering what the heck's been going on for the last twelve years.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by voxpops View Post
      "Now I think I will go out and water my trees. f"

      He says this after a eulogy on the passing of his friend in SB 208. My American father-in-law had been prone to "watering his trees" in the evening. It was a kind of ritual. Is FF hinting that passing water is of deep emotional and spiritual signifcance to him?
      I think that "shedding" may be a better/more appropriate term. I'm reluctant to say too much at this time.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by voxpops View Post

        I agree. But I don't think he revealed the whole truth about his intentions, his methods or the find. If it was all so clear and cut and dried we wouldn't still be here wondering what the heck's been going on for the last twelve years.
        I say that his poem worked just as he hoped it would. Even if the Jack really "found" the treasure, I don't believe he actually solved the poem entirely. It might be possible that Fenn underestimated the probability of someone confidently getting close and smothering the area over an extended period of time. I'll reiterate and say that it could still be solved, but no monetary reward at the end. Nothing outside the poem will help before solving it. Just endless cyber-speak. That seems to be the norm. I believe Forrest Fenn wasn't obligated to acknowledge his methods or intentions beyond what he implied. His only mistake was to invite the wildcats into his home.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by klein View Post

          I say that his poem worked just as he hoped it would. Even if the Jack really "found" the treasure, I don't believe he actually solved the poem entirely. It might be possible that Fenn underestimated the probability of someone confidently getting close and smothering the area over an extended period of time. I'll reiterate and say that it could still be solved, but no monetary reward at the end. Nothing outside the poem will help before solving it. Just endless cyber-speak. That seems to be the norm. I believe Forrest Fenn wasn't obligated to acknowledge his methods or intentions beyond what he implied. His only mistake was to invite the wildcats into his home.
          No his mistake wasn’t in inviting them in it was letting them out of the bag.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by voxpops View Post

            That's certainly possible, although this is what he actually says:
            "I shall not mourn the passing of my friend, but instead, will smile and remember the many good times we had, like when we both played big shots in a high school football game, and put plugs of Red Man chewing tobacco under our cheeks."

            Smile, not cry. It's probably quite difficult to water trees with tears.
            For the good times.....
            https://youtu.be/phLlo_t-z-U

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by klein View Post
              All of the information to find the treasure is in the poem. There are a couple of good hints in TTOTC if they can be recognized. It's in the poem for all to see. Everything else is just a fantasy. It may be possible to backtrack after solving the poem and see something that he may have been hinting at... but good luck with that. He wrote and said thousands of things over the years and continued to say everything a searcher needed was in the poem. I believe the poem can be solved.
              Quote, "I believe the poem can be solved".......I believe you're correct, 'cos it HAS been solved !

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Cowboyrocker View Post
                What a nice thread! Thanks, VP! Me as a simple one-track-minded boy, I was asking myself, why hoB wasn't ever mentioned in here...
                Hey Cowboy,
                The water in WWWHs at Bisti is pointed to....by the golden double omega (DO)at Bisti (golden coloredwater/pee). This DO leads you to the nail/spike at WWWHs and the grove (trove of juniper trees in the shape of an arrow)...the hidey hole. You see the DO when standing on hoB at sunset. Don't know if I've mentioned in here before, but the DO is represented in the Navajo myth "The House of the Father Sun" by twins (DO). The myth is about the twins who are the offspring of "Father Sun." And in this way, the water, the myth, the DO, the hoB and the Sun are used by Forrest to point to the hidey hole. Cheers.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by UNtitleD Brave View Post

                  Quote, "I believe the poem can be solved".......I believe you're correct, 'cos it HAS been solved !
                  What evidence is there for this?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Old Pilot View Post

                    What evidence is there for this?
                    Give me minute and I'll second that opinion. Oh wait! Is an h.our too long?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Let's consider a couple of words. FF said that some might find his autobiography "dull." Thinking about the kind of life he's led and the people he's met that seems unlikely and so it prompted me to look up the word "dull." Here's what popped up:

                      Click image for larger version  Name:	dull.png Views:	0 Size:	63.1 KB ID:	374805

                      "Crazy," "mad," "fantastic," "wonderful," stupid." Now compared to "tedious," uninteresting," "not sharp," etc., which seems the most likely set of definitions?

                      How about "original?" I haven't bothered to seek out that term's "origins," but would that be a fair word to use when it comes to someone like FF? If so let's apply what we know about him to this crazy, mad, fantastic, wonderful, stupid, original treasure hunt.

                      Some still believe that it's just the result of an old man's pastime and that if and when we know the truth it'll be some directions to a fishing hole or rocky niche. And that's it, end of story, we can all get on with our lives and laugh at Jack thinking we'd even want to pay for the gas to go and rummage around there.

                      Former fighter pilot ace, archaeologist, author, gallery owner, (possible) CIA agent, hoster of presidents, movie stars, defense specialists etc. spends the last quarter of his life devising a way to hide a million or two in gold and artefacts and coordinating a treasure hunt that seemingly defies logic and ends in the strangest set of circumstances. And this is "ordinary?"

                      ordinary
                      ôr′dn-ĕr″ē

                      adjective
                      1. Commonly encountered; usual: synonym: common.
                      2. Of no exceptional ability, degree, or quality; average.
                      3. Not particularly good; not better than average.

                      The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

                      So, if it's not "ordinary," what is it? Why would it be unrealistic to think that it may include, for example, shamanistic elements from a man who understands Native American culture better than most and who describes himself as "most spiritual?" To my mind, there is undoubtedly something very deep to be uncovered.




                      voxpops
                      Senior Member
                      Last edited by voxpops; 01-15-2022, 09:56 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Old Pilot View Post

                        What evidence is there for this?
                        The evidence is in my solve that I haven't detailed on the forum.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          "Dal, if the searchers leave a blaze after they finish looking for the treasure then the next guy may think it is my blaze. What about tying a ribbon on a tree or nailing some kind object to a tree. If everyone does the same thing then it will not be confused with what I did. Maybe nailing a calling card to an abandoned house or a barn or whatever is near where they thought the treasure was? f"

                          What is interesting about this is the idea of a "calling card." I've heard people use this expression when referring to a dog or other animal marking its territory. And we have "nailing" used twice in this statement. Searchers were told to "nail down" where warm waters halt. (Don't know about you but I never carried a hammer and nails in my backpack when BOTG.) So "nail" and "calling card together . . . ?

                          Then what about the missing "of" in "kind object"? Just a typo? FF said he proofread everything three times. So what is a kind object nailed to a tree? Does it relate to watering the trees? Idk. Just food for thought.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            What amazes me is that people are so sure of their solves (me included). But in my mind, the solve stands on its own and is supported by the poem. It works in unison and has supporting ideas. The frustrating part is nobody can accept the gibberish that spills out because they simply can’t see it because of the lack of knowlege. Forrest said imagination was more important than knowlege… that doesn’t mean knowlege isn’t. I may sound like a simpleton at face value, but at least I have my ideas. You can’t find wwwh unless you solve the whole poem. It’s as simple as that. If you can’t agree with that theory then by all means judge and object to it. And let me know. Sorry, I didn’t mean to get on my soap box.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Voxpox.. Thank you for posting that first quote. I seen it before. But never thought how huge of statement that actualy is. " What i did" FF created the Blaze. So that eliminates so many blazes I've heard on here. Airplanes, rock formations, basically anything not altered.. His blaze was created by him. And that's why Jack-ass was supposedly fooled by a different manmade blaze. Thank you. I always said if we work together by process of elimination. we might have a chance. But there was to many ambushers and egomaniacs.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Sunburnt1 View Post
                                Voxpox.. Thank you for posting that first quote. I seen it before. But never thought how huge of statement that actualy is. " What i did" FF created the Blaze. So that eliminates so many blazes I've heard on here. Airplanes, rock formations, basically anything not altered.. His blaze was created by him. And that's why Jack-ass was supposedly fooled by a different manmade blaze. Thank you. I always said if we work together by process of elimination. we might have a chance. But there was to many ambushers and egomaniacs.
                                Yes, that's a really good point. It certainly sounds like we're not looking for a natural formation (and we won't find it driving down the road, apparently).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X