The Solution only applies to Colorado.

[Hear me all]

All true. I would not have left home on a trip if I didn't have an end-to-end solution, so guilty as charged. The difference is, I *eliminated* solution theories on each trip, such as the treasure wasn't on an island in a river -- a theory you once espoused yourself, though a different island.
For me, yes and no. To me, the biggest part of making progress was not hand-waiving away any statements Forrest made that didn't fit my evolving solution. Every failed trip was one that dismissed one or more of his statements, and that was proof enough for me that a good solution had to fit them all.

My final solution, prior to the June 2020 find announcement, violated not ONE of Forrest's statements (which were mostly statements of exclusion). So at least in that respect, it would seem to be better than anything you ever came up with, and better than anything anyone else has posted here, or on Dal's or Jenny's. Yes, we're all in love with our own solutions, but man there are some really bad ones out there.

HMA: I just want you to admit a hypothetical: if there is a solution that matches everything Forrest has said, without twisted caveats, would you not agree that it has a better chance of being right than an alternate solution that is inconsistent with one (or more typically a dozen) of Forrest's treasure hunt-related claims?

Right back at you.

You don't believe that, so don't pretend you do. Jack and Forrest claim the treasure was hidden and found in Wyoming, and by Jack's own admission he did not have an end-to-end solution. He brute-forced the ending (at least so he says). And obviously the in situ find photos are 100% at odds with your spot, therefore you believe collusion between Forrest and Jack about both the find images and the find state. In other words, you're right, Jack's wrong, and Forrest is a liar. I wish you would explain that.

So here's how I see it. Forrest said knowledge and/or knowlege were a waste and instead imagination in larger doses was needed. Your solutions shipwrecked in the canyon each time because you tried to solve the poem using knowledge instead of imagination. Kids, rednecks, average Joe's don't come up with the kinds of ideas you had. Furthermore F repeatedly told us what a poor student he was amd how his imagination propelled him along much more than education ever could or would. I tried the knowledge approach amd it was a recipe for disaster with the poem. Just making simple connections amd correlations was all that was needed. Forrest designed something so simple it stumped searchers from the beginning and for many years because they thought it had to be tough when in fact all it took was seeing things a bit differently. That's the way some things are designed. They appear complicated when they are truly the simplest and most obvious. Using knowledge excludes all the what ifs and cripples ideas. Perhaps it's the work you do that made you stick with the knowledge approach.

Jack has lied about numerous things since outing himself. The more he communicated the more he trapped himself. Forrest lied but didn't want to. Jack isn't staying quiet about the solution because of the wishes of Forrest, the park, or nature. Jack is worried about legitimate claims against him. So he will lie all day long and finally figured out that staying quiet serves him better.

The e-mails between Jack and F show that Jack was sucked into the Chase on the same level as most other searchers. No winder Forrest got sick of all the correspondence. Jack was relentless in wanting F to respond to him. No rules in the Chase and F was able to do as he pleased so nobody should have sympathy for the massive emails he received. The ones from searchers that crossed the line were in a different category and those folks have probably always needed help.

At some point the light will shine and I would love to see the faces of those who despised imagination.

[Zapster]

HMA: I did not use simply knowledge. I depended heavily on logic and unconventional thinking. That, to me, is synonymous with imagination. I came up with a solution to "Not far, but too far to walk" that was totally unique, yet simple and unexpected that not one other public poster did.

And a lot more than that: I estimated the statistical odds of the association I uncovered occurring by random chance: something no one else in the Chase ever did -- yourself included. Searchers make these absurd blanket statements about how things in their solutions could never happen by chance; I seemed to be unique in actually bothering to accurately compute the true odds of my associations happening by random chance, and I never made exaggerated accounts of those odds. They weren't millions to 1, or even hundreds of thousands to 1, but they were "more than a few" thousands to 1. That was good enough for me to pursue my line of reasoning.

[Old Pilot]

It works better than anywhere else I've read for WWWH.

Where is the northwest entrance to YNP? (For example, what major hwy is it near?)

[Old Pilot]

Forrest never truly lied, he was a straight shooter.

Do you believe the chest was hidden in the state of Wyoming Zap?

That's a lame question. If Forrest drove through the State of Wyoming with the chest (hidden in the vehicle he was driving), then the chest was hidden -- for a while -- in the State of Wyoming.

[Old Pilot]

I'd ~like~ to believe Forrest wouldn't mislead about something that significant, but I'm bothered by the strange wording of that revelation. I wouldn't be too amused if he stretched the truth here by, for instance, uncolloquially meaning Wyoming craton and not the state, thus opening it to WY or MT.

That said, I haven't been able to come up with a good solution in Wyoming (and not for lack of trying), while I have had a fantastic solution for Montana for the last 2 1/2 years.

This pretty much agrees with my thinking. Thank you for answering that question, even though your answer was kinda evasive, and not the "Yes" or "No" that was probably expected. I'd ask if you are in politics, but that would also be a "Yes" or "No" question, and I know better than to do that with you. HA HA HA HA HA HA !

[trueyeti]

That's a lame question. If Forrest drove through the State of Wyoming with the chest (hidden in the vehicle he was driving), then the chest was hidden -- for a while -- in the State of Wyoming.

Hey OP,
That's a lame claim that lays the blame, leaves one in shame, is that your game? "If and then," and then a claim without a finding to support the claim of the "if" and the "then." And when oh when are you going to bed? IMOIMOIMOIMO is missing from this here "if and then" comment matey. What ya tryin to do spit mud in the eye? Heck, your leaving the audience in shame and blame and mud in the eye to boot. Oh my my....you are such a hoot.....Do you wear a Zoot-Suit? I can picture you as a Zoot-Suit coyote as Van Halen sings....man that suite is you...you'll get some leg tonite for sure! Tell us how you dooooo......Cheers. hehehe

[Zapster]

Where is the northwest entrance to YNP? (For example, what major hwy is it near?)

Hwy 191: Gallatin Highway, about a half-hour north of West Yellowstone.

[Zapster]

This pretty much agrees with my thinking. Thank you for answering that question, even though your answer was kinda evasive, and not the "Yes" or "No" that was probably expected.

If forced to choose a binary answer, I'd say no: that the treasure chest was not hidden in the state of Wyoming, primarily because no end-to-end solution has ever surfaced that was even sort of good, nor have I managed to come up with one in 7+ years.

I did home in on Ice Box Canyon for WWWH/Canyon down when I first started the Chase (as did many others, I later discovered), but for me the clues petered out after that (similar to how they do with Madison Junction or the Yellowstone caldera intersection with the Madison as WWWH + Madison Canyon).

[Hear me all]

HMA: I did not use simply knowledge. I depended heavily on logic and unconventional thinking. That, to me, is synonymous with imagination. I came up with a solution to "Not far, but too far to walk" that was totally unique, yet simple and unexpected that not one other public poster did.

And a lot more than that: I estimated the statistical odds of the association I uncovered occurring by random chance: something no one else in the Chase ever did -- yourself included. Searchers make these absurd blanket statements about how things in their solutions could never happen by chance; I seemed to be unique in actually bothering to accurately compute the true odds of my associations happening by random chance, and I never made exaggerated accounts of those odds. They weren't millions to 1, or even hundreds of thousands to 1, but they were "more than a few" thousands to 1. That was good enough for me to pursue my line of reasoning.

In my view, calculating statistical odds is something one would use when looking for absolutes. This was a treasure hunt with no rules or absolutes. True imagination is hindered and/or excluded when one starts categorizing and believes only certain things are possible. An open mind will consider all the possibilities without ruling any out.

[Zapster]

In my opinion, if you don't consider the statistics of the null hypothesis, you have no gauge for measuring whether some pattern you latch onto is random or deliberate.