Discussions by bloggers and various chat-sites over the last couple months have speculated about people who came within 500/200 feet of the chest in conjunction with those who solved the first two clues correctly. From these ideas, theories have sprung up about the chest being within 500/200 feet of the second clue, or even the first clue. I suppose these might be good theories if one considers affirming the consequent as a viable way of appropriately determining a definitive fact.
For several years, and in the process of collecting quotes and comments from Forrest and others, I have been compiling and analyzing the comments about those within 500/200 feet and those who got clues correct. I had written a blog post a number of months ago to post here, but decided against doing so because it was the sum total of 43 different comments on the subject that revealed far more detail than I really wanted to divulge to the world. So I have instead sat on it.
But I think it is now worth revisiting and taking a look at from a much higher elevation…
What we know for fact from comments by Forrest:
- People/Searchers (who emailed f) have been at a spot within 500 feet of the chest.
- People/Searchers (who emailed f) have been at a spot approximately 200 feet from the chest.
- People/Searchers correctly figured out the first two clues and 'went right past' / 'walked right past' / 'walked right on by' the chest.
So a question that quickly arises is whether or not those who were within 500 feet were also the same people who had the first two clues correct. (Note that Forrest himself stopped mentioning people being within 500 feet and started using 200 feet in August 2013, if you care for another fact.)
Two comments that I think are worth consideration:
“There have been some who have been within 500 feet because they have told me where they have been. Others have figured the first two clues and went right past the treasure and didn’t know it.” (3/8/13)
“After our failed attempt to recover the chest, I wrote Forrest and asked how can someone be 500 feet away and only solve 2 of the 9 clues? Forrest stated that it was 2 different searchers.” (3/30/13)
In March 2013, I believe Forrest clearly indicated that those within 500 feet were NOT those who had solved the first two clues.
So I throw out any searchers prior to 3/30/13, who were within 500 feet, as searchers who also had correctly solved the first two clues. And because those who were within 500 feet were NOT those who had correctly solved the first two clues, the chest cannot be within 500 feet of the second (or first) clue where the ‘two-clues-correct’ searchers had been.
The distance to the chest for those who got the first two clues correct would need to be greater than 500 feet. I would say these searchers were way more than 500 feet away from the chest (maybe something closer to a mile, give or take a little? I digress… that topic is for some other day).
Some might want to argue that those who solved the first two clues might never have been on location searching, but Forrest specifically says “they went right past the treasure chest and didn’t find it” and they “got pretty close”. Forrest saying that they were ‘pretty close’ and that they ‘didn’t find’ the chest would be strange language to use for people who were ‘never there’ at the general location to begin with.
Some may also raise a question about Forrest saying that searchers who got the first two clues correct “went right by” and “walked right past” the chest. We’ll take a look at that one in part two…
Just how much detail about finding Forrest’s hidden chest is contained in ALL his comments? Those who do not thoroughly study, analyze, and think them through will never know… and will always remain in ignorance. The best and most complete source is only a couple clicks away.