Montana Clave?

jeff typed:
On 2/9/2011 8:02 PM, jeff wrote:
On 2/9/2011 2:05 PM, Ken Fortenberry wrote:
flebow wrote:
Any interest?

This would be a good opportunity to finally put to rest the
Fawn Lake rumor.

What we need is an expedition equipped with GPS devices and
digital cameras.

Any volunteers ? Jeffie ?

if you agree to show up, and we have at least one other disinterested
person accompany us to record and report the event...sure, i'm in.

how about a bet? i say and bet there's a fawn lake. you say and bet
it doesn't exist. loser pays the other's roundtrip airfare to
bozeman, buys the night's meal and beer in the park, and makes a
public statement on roff admitting the other person was right about
fawn lake. i think i can walk us to the lake without a gps...it's
just beyond the backcountry campground...but bring your gps. don't
worry, i'll have a camera. gotta have a photo of you at the lake.
we'll get warren to come along too. we can fish two small brookie
streams and the lake. @ 12 miles roundtrip as i recall. i'm old, and
i'm miserably out of shape...this will give me another reason to get
fit.

since the bet has been avoided... here's a link sent to me by a
friend...
http://www.yellowstone.co/lakes/fawn.htm

You DO realize you're being tweaked by the master-tweaker, right? ;-)
--
TL,
Tim

Tim J. wrote:
jeff typed:
since the bet has been avoided...

You DO realize you're being tweaked by the master-tweaker, right? ;-)

I suppose we're still looking for volunteers with cameras *AND*
GPS units to settle the Fawn Lake rumor. You will remember that
no one has ever been photographed standing in or around the
alleged Fawn Lake while at the same time displaying their GPS
coordinates to the camera. Given that this rumor has been floating
around for several years now I find that lack of documentation
more than just a little suspicious. Don't you ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Feb 11, 9:49*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

no one has ever been photographed standing in or around the
alleged Fawn Lake while at the same time displaying their GPS
coordinates to the camera. Given that this rumor has been floating
around for several years now I find that lack of documentation
more than just a little suspicious. Don't you ?

1) There are GPS coordinates on the map on Jeff's link. Plus a
satellite image with trails marked. Is it or is it not the location of
(what you call) Fawn Lake?

2) Anyone who has looked at even a few satellite images would
recognize a body of water. The lake is full in the picture.

3) As far as I can tell, a little tab in the lower left seems to
indicate the picture was taken in 1994? Assuming you answer yes to
(1), are you contending that it has since dried up?

Or is this some vast conspiracy...like the faked moon landings?

Curious minds want to know.

Jon.
(Personally, my best _logical_ explanation is that you indeed did see
it after perhaps a few years of drought and it _was_ hardly there, and
that others visited it after it returned to a status like that in the
picture...but then who ever said there must be a logical explanation
for this particular roffian spat?)

Jonathan Cook wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
no one has ever been photographed standing in or around the
alleged Fawn Lake while at the same time displaying their GPS
coordinates to the camera. Given that this rumor has been floating
around for several years now I find that lack of documentation
more than just a little suspicious. Don't you ?

1) There are GPS coordinates on the map on Jeff's link. Plus a
satellite image with trails marked. Is it or is it not the location of
(what you call) Fawn Lake?

2) Anyone who has looked at even a few satellite images would
recognize a body of water. The lake is full in the picture.

3) As far as I can tell, a little tab in the lower left seems to
indicate the picture was taken in 1994? Assuming you answer yes to
(1), are you contending that it has since dried up?

Or is this some vast conspiracy...like the faked moon landings?

Curious minds want to know.

That is not really a lake. It just looks like a lake from certain
angles. Like I said, I have never seen a photograph of the so-called
Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates in the same frame. You'd think
that after all the roffian expeditions undertaken to *prove* this
rumor of a lake exists that someone would have thought to display
the GPS coordinates. Sounds fishy to me.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Feb 11, 11:28*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

That is not really a lake. It just looks like a lake from certain
angles. Like I said, I have never seen a photograph of the so-called
Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates in the same frame. You'd think
that after all the roffian expeditions undertaken to *prove* this
rumor of a lake exists that someone would have thought to display
the GPS coordinates. Sounds fishy to me.

--
Ken Fortenberry

If someone DID post a photo of Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates
you'd merely claim it a fake.

typed:
On Feb 11, 11:28 am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

That is not really a lake. It just looks like a lake from certain
angles. Like I said, I have never seen a photograph of the so-called
Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates in the same frame. You'd think
that after all the roffian expeditions undertaken to *prove* this
rumor of a lake exists that someone would have thought to display
the GPS coordinates. Sounds fishy to me.


If someone DID post a photo of Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates
you'd merely claim it a fake.

Yeah, but since having them go through the exercise over and over again is
the goal, it kinda makes sense, right?
--
TL,
Tim

On 2/11/2011 1:52 PM, Tim J. wrote:

If someone DID post a photo of Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates
you'd merely claim it a fake.

Yeah, but since having them go through the exercise over and over again is
the goal, it kinda makes sense, right?

I'm starting to wonder if someone out there is paying a commission for
every tourist traveling the trail down to Fawn Lake. Somehow, Forty must
have to be getting a cut of the action.

Tom

On Feb 11, 12:28*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Jonathan Cook wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
no one has ever been photographed standing in or around the
alleged Fawn Lake while at the same time displaying their GPS
coordinates to the camera. Given that this rumor has been floating
around for several years now I find that lack of documentation
more than just a little suspicious. Don't you ?

1) There are GPS coordinates on the map on Jeff's link. Plus a
satellite image with trails marked. Is it or is it not the location of
(what you call) Fawn Lake?

2) Anyone who has looked at even a few satellite images would
recognize a body of water. The lake is full in the picture.

3) As far as I can tell, a little tab in the lower left seems to
indicate the picture was taken in 1994? Assuming you answer yes to
(1), are you contending that it has since dried up?

Or is this some vast conspiracy...like the faked moon landings?

Curious minds want to know.

That is not really a lake. It just looks like a lake from certain
angles. Like I said, I have never seen a photograph of the so-called
Fawn Lake *AND* the GPS coordinates in the same frame. You'd think
that after all the roffian expeditions undertaken to *prove* this
rumor of a lake exists that someone would have thought to display
the GPS coordinates. Sounds fishy to me.

--
Ken Fortenberry

moron.

g.

On Feb 11, 11:44*am, Jonathan Cook wrote:
On Feb 11, 9:49*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

no one has ever been photographed standing in or around the
alleged Fawn Lake while at the same time displaying their GPS
coordinates to the camera. Given that this rumor has been floating
around for several years now I find that lack of documentation
more than just a little suspicious. Don't you ?

1) There are GPS coordinates on the map on Jeff's link. Plus a
satellite image with trails marked. Is it or is it not the location of
(what you call) Fawn Lake?

2) Anyone who has looked at even a few satellite images would
recognize a body of water. The lake is full in the picture.

3) As far as I can tell, a little tab in the lower left seems to
indicate the picture was taken in 1994? Assuming you answer yes to
(1), are you contending that it has since dried up?

Or is this some vast conspiracy...like the faked moon landings?

Curious minds want to know.

Jon.
(Personally, my best _logical_ explanation is that you indeed did see
it after perhaps a few years of drought and it _was_ hardly there, and
that others visited it after it returned to a status like that in the
picture...but then who ever said there must be a logical explanation
for this particular roffian spat?)

Actually, there IS a superbly logical explanation.

You STILL take that piece of **** seriously.

The implications.....well, think about it.

g.

On 2/11/2011 12:44 PM, Jonathan Cook wrote:
On Feb 11, 9:49 am, Ken
wrote:

no one has ever been photographed standing in or around the
alleged Fawn Lake while at the same time displaying their GPS
coordinates to the camera. Given that this rumor has been floating
around for several years now I find that lack of documentation
more than just a little suspicious. Don't you ?

1) There are GPS coordinates on the map on Jeff's link. Plus a
satellite image with trails marked. Is it or is it not the location of
(what you call) Fawn Lake?

2) Anyone who has looked at even a few satellite images would
recognize a body of water. The lake is full in the picture.

3) As far as I can tell, a little tab in the lower left seems to
indicate the picture was taken in 1994? Assuming you answer yes to
(1), are you contending that it has since dried up?

Or is this some vast conspiracy...like the faked moon landings?

Curious minds want to know.

Jon.
(Personally, my best _logical_ explanation is that you indeed did see
it after perhaps a few years of drought and it _was_ hardly there, and
that others visited it after it returned to a status like that in the
picture...but then who ever said there must be a logical explanation
for this particular roffian spat?)

the issue arises, and the explanation is, fortenberry called me a liar
about fawn lake. he wasn't "tweaking" at the time. unless he's erased
his posts, it's all there to see for anyone who knows how to do the
historical google groups check. he plainly said there was no fawn lake.

i've been there twice...different years. outfitters take people up
there. it's a deep lake with lots of fish in it...some large brook
trout. i doubt it ever dries up.

fortenberry simply did not know what he was talking about, and now he
continues his "who you gonna believe" game, along with the inconsistent
statement that it's a long hike for mediocre fishing when there is
better fishing elsewhere.

the lake is just off the well-established trail near the gardner
headwaters, and a decent number of folks find the hike and camping in
the area worthwhile. the scenery is magnificent, as is the case in all
of the park areas i've visited. there are grizzlies in the area...we
saw one on the first trip. but there are griz at slough creek too (saw
them there with cubs).

chas, charlie choc, joe mcintosh, john hightower, warren findley, and i
have been to the lake. we have photos of it. warren caught a big brook
trout there. craig matthews at the blue ribbon shop will confirm the
lake's existence if anyone wants to call him.

i guess it became a principled issue for me...and i decided to prove
fortenberry was the liar...which i did, and which he is... about fawn
lake. now, when he chooses to raise the issue, even in a sardonic or
"tweaky" way, i'm happy to remind him and others of his ignorance and
lies. ...so it goes.

folks can try to rationalize forty's statements about the
lake...lacourse tried the theory that he was talking about some other
area, but he wasn't. truth is, ken was/is simply and undeniably
wrong...and he's not made of adequate stuff to admit his mistake or to
apologize for the stupid things he said.

jeff