| Author | Message | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2010 |
Hello all. I'm new here and I couldn't resist posting my own puzzle for the first time, so I hope this goes well! As far as I know, this isn't a classic, and no one else I've told has ever heard it before: A forest ranger satisfactorily surveyed the scene before him. His quick reasoning had paid off. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 1779 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was the scene a forest? does he see a person? More than one? An animal? More than one? Did he: prevent something from happening? Something criminal? Something bad? Catch someone? Save someone? Make something happen? Did he outsmart someone? Was it only quick reasoning that affected the outcome? Or quick reaction as well? Is fire invovled? Is he in the forest? Did this happen in present time? If not: the last decade? 50 years? 100? 500? Longer ago? | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 1732 Registered: 7-2009 |
Is a forest fire relevant? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 2 Registered: 5-2010 |
Galfisk: Was the scene a forest? yes does he see a person? More than one? yes An animal? More than one? yes Did he: prevent something from happening? yes Something criminal? no Something bad? yes Catch someone? no Save someone? yes Make something happen? I guess you could say that Did he outsmart someone? yope Was it only quick reasoning that affected the outcome? no Or quick reaction as well? irrel. Is fire invovled? no Is he in the forest? yes Did this happen in present time? irrel. but assume yes If not: the last decade? 50 years? 100? 500? Longer ago? Noel: Is a forest fire relevant? no | ||
| Gourami (Gourami)
Moderator Username: Gourami Post Number: 1164 Registered: 10-2008 |
Did he save people from an animal? Or one person? Did he save an animal from people? Are the other people involved hunters? Campers? Rangers? Hikers? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 4 Registered: 5-2010 |
Gourami: Did he save people from an animal? Or one person? This. Did he save an animal from people? No. Are the other people involved hunters? No. Campers? Possibly. Rangers? No. Hikers? Possibly. They had no particular skill or job to do here, so let's just say that they were hikers. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 1794 Registered: 9-2009 |
So he saved one person from some animals, correct? Or just one animal? Did the other people assist him? Hinder him? Just look on? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2646 Registered: 5-2003 |
Just checking - Is the ranger HAM? Or is he Smokey the Bear? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 5 Registered: 5-2010 |
Galfisk: So he saved one person from some animals, correct? Or just one animal? A bit of a tricky one this, there is more than one animal involved in this story, but the person was saved from just one of them. Did the other people assist him? yes, but not directly. Hinder him? No. Just look on? Not exactly. Jenburdoo: Just checking - Is the ranger HAM? H,A - yes. M/F is irrelevant. Let's assume M. Or is he Smokey the Bear? Ha ha, no, definitely not! (I don't know who Smokey the Bear is, but I'm going to google him now!) | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 14 Registered: 5-2010 |
Are all the animals involved in the story the same type of animals? Are they the kind of animals that normally exist in the forest? Geographical location relevant? Was the ranger on foot? In a vehicle of some kind? Did he kill the animal? Deter it? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 6 Registered: 5-2010 |
It so happened: Are all the animals involved in the story the same type of animals? Yes. Are they the kind of animals that normally exist in the forest? Yes. Geographical location relevant? No. Was the ranger on foot? Yes. In a vehicle of some kind? No. Did he kill the animal? To some extent this is irrelevant. But assume yes. Deter it? No. | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 42 Registered: 5-2010 |
Are the animals generally considered dangerous? Bears? Wolves? Bees? Snakes? If not those, are the animals: mammals? reptiles? birds? insects? amphibians? fish? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 7 Registered: 5-2010 |
It so happened: Are the animals generally considered dangerous? Yes. Bears? Yes. Wolves? Bees? Snakes? If not those, are the animals: mammals? reptiles? birds? insects? amphibians? fish? No to the rest. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 1854 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did the person get between a bear mother and her cubs? Did the ranger: trick the bear? Stop the bear? Scare it? Tranquilize it? Or did he do something to the person? Is the person HAM? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 8 Registered: 5-2010 |
Galfisk: Did the person get between a bear mother and her cubs? No. Did the ranger: trick the bear? No. Stop the bear? You could say that. Scare it? No. Tranquilize it? No. Or did he do something to the person? He didn't do anything to the person. Is the person HAM? Yes. Hint: Galfisk only asks about one bear and one person! | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 1896 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he do something to some other bear(s)? Some of the other people? Were all the bears wild bears? Grown bears? Were the bears friendly towards eachother? Relevant? Did the person in danger do something unwise? Or was he in the wrong place at the wrong time? Relevant? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 9 Registered: 5-2010 |
Galfisk: Did he do something to some other bear(s)? I'll assume you are asking about the ranger. He only did something to one of the bears. Some of the other people? No. Were all the bears wild bears? Yes. Grown bears? Yes. Were the bears friendly towards each other? Yes Relevant? I guess it is, yes. Did the person in danger do something unwise? No. Or was he in the wrong place at the wrong time? Yes. Relevant? Not really, although if he/they had been in a different place or had been here at a different time, then this story probably wouldn't have happened :-). | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 10 Registered: 5-2010 |
---Recap--- We are in a forest in present times. There is a ranger (who is on foot), more than one person (hikers - but not really relevant) and more than one bear. With the assistance of a person, the ranger (HAM) ultimately saves another person (HAM) from a bear. To save the person he had to do something/make something happen, resulting in one or more bears being stopped from what they were doing and possibly (but not relevant to the story) dying. In doing this you could say that he outsmarted someone. These bears were adult and dangerous, but can be assumed to be friendly towards each other. | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 162 Registered: 5-2010 |
So did he outsmart the person in danger? Some other person? Did he have a relevant item with him that helped stop the bear? Did he do something to/with the other bears? Did he distract the bear? Lure the bear away? Did he use the assistance of another ranger? Another hiker? The hiker in danger? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 11 Registered: 5-2010 |
It so happened: So did he outsmart the person in danger? No. Some other person? Yes, although the fact that he 'outsmarted' someone is just anecdotal to the story. He wasn't trying to outsmart anyone. In fact it's more like he proved to know better than someone. I hope I didn't mislead too much... Did he have a relevant item with him that helped stop the bear? Yes. Did he do something to/with the other bears? Largely irrelevant, but assume whatever he did to the other bear(s) wasn't the same as what he did to the first bear. Did he distract the bear? Lure the bear away? Did he use the assistance of another ranger? Another hiker? The hiker in danger? No to the rest. | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 167 Registered: 5-2010 |
Did he break some kind of rule? Or disprove a theory? Did he have something that hit the bear (a weapon of sorts?) Did he have a chemical or liquid? Did what he did to the bear happen without the bear's knowledge? Or did it require the bear's attention? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 12 Registered: 5-2010 |
It so happened: Did he break some kind of rule? No. Or disprove a theory? No. Not a theory. Did he have something that hit the bear (a weapon of sorts?) Yes. Did he have a chemical or liquid? Did what he did to the bear happen without the bear's knowledge? Or did it require the bear's attention? No to the rest. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 2033 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he know better than someone about: bear behavior? People? Nature? Is that someone present? Did that someone have a different solution to the issue at hand? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 13 Registered: 5-2010 |
Galfisk: Did he know better than someone about: bear behavior? Irrelevant. People? Yes! Nature? Irrelevant. Is that someone present ? Yes. Did that someone have a different solution to the issue at hand? Yes! | ||
| Ohlala8 (Ohlala8)
New member Username: Ohlala8 Post Number: 574 Registered: 6-2009 |
Related to the old adage that "you don't have to outrun the bear, you just have to outrun your slowest friend?" | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 14 Registered: 5-2010 |
Ohlala8: Related to the old adage that "you don't have to outrun the bear, you just have to outrun your slowest friend?" It's certainly not as easy as that! | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 2147 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he know better about how people would react to the prescence of bears? How the person in danger would react? Did the ranger hit the bear? Did someone else? Did it make the bear: angry? Go away? Distracted? Is this a true story? Or a story from a comic book? Honey invovled? Junior Woodchucks? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 15 Registered: 5-2010 |
Did he know better about how people would react to the prescence of bears? No. How the person in danger would react? Not 'would react', but 'reacted' - yes. Did the ranger hit the bear? He had to knock them both out, yes. Did someone else? No. Did it make the bear: angry? Go away? Distracted? No, no, and no. They were unconscious. Is this a true story? I doubt it! Or a story from a comic book? Not as far as I know. Honey invovled? No. Junior Woodchucks? :-D No! To push things in the right direction: We need to know more about the hikers, and more about the current state of the bears. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 2424 Registered: 9-2009 |
Are the hikers: hiking? Camping? Fishing? Eating? Preparing food? Doing something else relevant? Do we need to know more about who they are, than the fact they are hikers? Can we treat all the hikers as a cohesive group for the purpose of the puzzle? Or do we need to single out individuals? Was the person in danger a hiker? Was the person "outsmarted" a hiker? Was this person the same one as the person in danger? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 16 Registered: 5-2010 |
Are the hikers: hiking? Camping? Fishing? Eating? Preparing food? Doing something else relevant? All irrelevant. Let's say they were walking/hiking. Do we need to know more about who they are, than the fact they are hikers? Yes, indeed! Can we treat all the hikers as a cohesive group for the purpose of the puzzle? No. Or do we need to single out individuals? Yes. Was the person in danger a hiker? Was the person "outsmarted" a hiker? It was stated earlier in the puzzle that it's irrelevant what they were (hikers/campers etc). They're just people in a forest. :-) Was this person the same one as the person in danger? The "outsmarted" one was not the one in danger. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 2555 Registered: 9-2009 |
So we have: Forest ranger Bears Person in danger from bears Person who has an idea about how to save this person from the bears Other people in the forest Can we consider the "other people" a group? Or do we need more individuals? Is the person in danger: trapped? Up a tree? In a vehicle? Being chased? Being held/pinned/injured by a bear? Is honey involved in any way? Is playing dead involved? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 17 Registered: 5-2010 |
So we have: Forest ranger Yes. Bears Yes. Person in danger from bears The person was in danger. Not anymore. This is why the forest ranger was satisfied - nobody died/got hurt. Person who has an idea about how to save this person from the bears Not an 'idea'. I'm going to push this one ahead a bit now because it is getting more confused than need be :-). There are only three people in this whole story. There are two bears. Two of the people are hikers/campers. The third is the ranger. One person was in danger of the bears. The other person went to seek help from the ranger. The ranger chose not to believe something the person said, and in doing this, saved the other person's life. Other people in the forest Apart from the three just mentioned, there is nobody else. Can we consider the "other people" a group? Or do we need more individuals? Answered above - there are only three individuals. Is the person in danger: trapped? Please remember that this story has just happened, so the person is no longer in danger, but was in danger. And yes, vital to the story, he was trapped! - but where? Up a tree? No. In a vehicle? No. Being chased? No. Being held/pinned/injured by a bear? You are sooo close! Is honey involved in any way? No. Is playing dead involved? No. We need more information on the current scene - not what happened in the past. The key to the past is what we see now! We need information on the current state of the bears, and also need background information about the campers/hikers (I think I mentioned that somewhere before) - It is vital for the story to make sense! Don't give up - I'd say we're almost halfway there! | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 2880 Registered: 9-2009 |
Are the bears: asleep? Running away? Eating something? Distracted? Angry? Was the person physically trapped? Or unable to get away without being hurt by the bears? Are the bears grownups? Cubs? Mother and cub? Did the hiker think the bears were: doing something they wouldn't? Looking for something they weren't? Is it important what bears like to eat? Eyesight or color vision important? Other senses? Do any of the hikers have experience with bears? With other animals? Is experience with other animals misapplied to the bears? Any of their professions important? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 18 Registered: 5-2010 |
Are the bears: asleep? Running away? Eating something? Distracted? Angry? In my post of July 6th I said that they 'were unconscious'. I should have said that they 'are unconscious'. Sorry about that. Just to be clear - we have two unconscious bears here :-) Was the person physically trapped? Yes. Or unable to get away without being hurt by the bears? More like the other way round - he/she couldn't get away without hurting the/a bear/s ;-) Are the bears grownups? Yes. Cubs? Mother and cub? So no, and no. Did the hiker In future posts when referring to one hiker, please state which :-) think the bears were: doing something they wouldn't? No. Looking for something they weren't? Not sure I understand this question, but it is probably a no, since nobody was looking for anything. Is it important what bears like to eat? In a sense, yes. But only because a slight stretching of the imagination is required here. I've heard it is theoretically possible for them to eat humans... (hint hint) Eyesight or color vision important? No. Other senses? No. Do any of the hikers have experience with bears? No. With other animals? Irrelevant. Is experience with other animals misapplied to the bears? No. Any of their professions important? No. But you're heading in the right direction by finding out more about them :-) | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 2946 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were the bears in a trap? The hikers? Relevant exactly how many bears there were? Hikers? If so, [LTPF list of integers] for both? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 19 Registered: 5-2010 |
Were the bears in a trap? No. The hikers? No. Relevant exactly how many bears there were? Not really, but a minimum of two is needed to explain the story, and any more than two would just complicate things needlessly. Hikers? The same - a minimum of two is needed to explain the story, and any more than two would just complicate things. If so, [LTPF list of integers] for both? As mentioned before in the post of August 01: There are two bears, and two hikers. I will also take this opportunity to repeat myself from a different post:- in order for this to proceed any further, we need to 1) find out more about the current state of the bears - we know they are unconscious, but any injuries...(hint)? (and we don't even know if they are male or female - hint!). 2) We also need to find out more about the hikers - both their present state(s), and certain background information about them is essential in this story! | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 3001 Registered: 4-2010 |
Are the bears male? Female? One of each? Were they protecting their cubs? From the hikers? Did the hikers really pose a threat? Or did the bears just perceive a threat? Were the hikers poachers? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 20 Registered: 5-2010 |
Are the bears male? Female? One of each? This! - extremely important to the story! I'm surprised no one has asked before! Were they protecting their cubs? No. From the hikers? Did the hikers really pose a threat? No. Or did the bears just perceive a threat? No. Were the hikers poachers? It's not really important, but let's say no. (If they were real poachers, they'd probably have guns in which case none of this would ever come to happen ;-) We need background information about the hikers now, and more details concerning the current state of the bears. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 3411 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were the hikers on a trail? Bushwhacking? Did the hikers expect to find bears? Are the hikers male? Female? One of each? A couple? Married? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 21 Registered: 5-2010 |
Were the hikers on a trail? Irrel. Bushwhacking? Irrel. Did the hikers expect to find bears? Irrelevant, but no, they probably didn't. Are the hikers male? Female? One of each? A couple? Married? They are both male, just friends. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 3439 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were the hikers merely hiking? Camping? Had they been out for a few days? For just the one day? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3055 Registered: 9-2009 |
Is the female bear in heat? Or pregnant? Relevant? Relevant how male and female bears respond to each other? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 22 Registered: 5-2010 |
Were the hikers merely hiking? Camping? It really doesn't matter what they were doing. Had they been out for a few days? For just the one day? Again, irrelevant. Is the female bear in heat? Or pregnant? Relevant? Relevant how male and female bears respond to each other? All irrelevant. Pointer - We need personal information about the hikers: we know they are both male and are friends, but we know nothing else about them. Also, in their current state, both bears are unconscious, and I will give away the fact that one of them is injured: the female bear has a huge hole cut in her belly. (And pregnancy is irrelevant.) | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 3696 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did the hikers think the female bear was dead? Were they trying to stuff her? Is one of the hikers a taxidermist? Was the hole cut by one of the hikers? Relevant the cutting instrument? Was it a knife? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 23 Registered: 5-2010 |
Did the hikers think the female bear was dead? No. Were they trying to stuff her? No. Is one of the hikers a taxidermist? No. Was the hole cut by one of the hikers? No. Relevant the cutting instrument? No. Was it a knife? Let's say yes. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 3873 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the hole cut by someone else? A poacher? Is the profession(s) of the hikers relevant? Of one of them? Do they have the same profession? Did they try to help the injured bear? Were they attacked by the male? In trying to do so? | ||
| Lordofthegeeks1000 (Lordofthegeeks1000)
New member Username: Lordofthegeeks1000 Post Number: 31 Registered: 1-2010 |
Was the hole cut by the ranger? Was the hole cut: -Before the hiker was attacked? -While he was being attacked? -After he was attacked? Were the bears following the hikers? Were the hikers following the bears? Is the way the hikers came into the forest relevant? Are any of the hikers' family/other friends relevant? Is it relevant whether they live around the forest? Is the location of the forest relevant? Is the type of bear relevant? Have the hikers known each other for a long time? Have the hikers: -Been to this forest before? -Met the ranger before? -Encountered any bears in the wild before? -Encountered these paticular bears before? Are any geographic features relevant (hills, rivers, etc.)? Was the hiker was saved from the bear (let's call him Bob): -endangering the bear? -provoking the bear? -trying to help the female bear? | ||
| Adzlike (Adzlike)
New member Username: Adzlike Post Number: 1 Registered: 9-2010 |
did the campers have fish on them prior to where we find ourselves now? Was the ranger a good man, or a bad man, by conventional standards? | ||
| Adzlike (Adzlike)
New member Username: Adzlike Post Number: 2 Registered: 9-2010 |
Were the campers claiming the bear had eaten something of theirs? | ||
| Adzlike (Adzlike)
New member Username: Adzlike Post Number: 3 Registered: 9-2010 |
Sorry, man. I just came running into this headfirst. Yes or no is the idea! Were the campers good? Were they bad? Any chance of a recap - because i read through all of this is one fell swoop and got a bit muddled with the details? Also, I'm going to seem like a rube for asking this, but what on Earth is HAM? This is my first time by the way, and i did try the FAQs, but no luck! Anyway, I want in, I want to figure this out. | ||
| Adzlike (Adzlike)
New member Username: Adzlike Post Number: 4 Registered: 9-2010 |
Was the hole cut in the bear's belly in order to remove something? that the campers claimed was there? is a bear hug relevant? were they, a camper and the wounded bear, involved in a sordid relationship of some sort? are the bears unconsiouss because of something ingested? are the campers now out of the woods, so to speak? or will there be questions asked about their actions? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4375 Registered: 4-2010 |
Adzlike: HAM = Human, Adult, Male. For this, and other abbreviations/lingo you might encounter, check this page out. And feel free to ask for help in the chatroom whenever you need. And welcome to the forum! | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 24 Registered: 5-2010 |
Hello there, sorry I haven't been around for a while, I've been pretty busy recently. Looks like there have been some good questions brewing...! Was the hole cut by someone else? Other than who? The people in this story? To cut a long story short: it was the ranger who cut the hole A poacher? Is the profession(s) of the hikers relevant? Not the professions... Of one of them? Do they have the same profession? Irrel. Did they try to help the injured bear? No. Were they attacked by the male? Not the male... In trying to do so? ...and not in trying to do so! Was the hole cut by the ranger? Yes Was the hole cut: -Before the hiker was attacked? -While he was being attacked? -After he was attacked? This Were the bears following the hikers? Irrel. Were the hikers following the bears? Irrel. Is the way the hikers came into the forest relevant? No. Are any of the hikers' family/other friends relevant? No. Is it relevant whether they live around the forest? Tough one this because of the way it is worded. I've been trying to steer in this direction for a while now. The location of where they currently live is irrelevant. Is the location of the forest relevant? Not really no, let's say for argument's sake Canada. Is the type of bear relevant? No. Have the hikers known each other for a long time? Yes. They are friends. Have the hikers: -Been to this forest before? Irrel. -Met the ranger before? No. -Encountered any bears in the wild before? Irrel. -Encountered these paticular bears before? No. Are any geographic features relevant (hills, rivers, etc.)? No. Was the hiker was saved from the bear (let's call him Bob): -endangering the bear? No. -provoking the bear? No. -trying to help the female bear? No. P.S. For reasons yet to be worked out, the hiker saved from the bear would not have been called Bob ;-) did the campers have fish on them prior to where we find ourselves now? No. If they had had fish on them, none of this may have happened... Was the ranger a good man, or a bad man, by conventional standards? a good man Were the campers claiming the bear had eaten something of theirs? So near but yet so far! Try rewording this together with the rest of the evidence here! Sorry, man. I just came running into this headfirst. Yes or no is the idea! Were the campers good? Yes. Were they bad? No. Any chance of a recap - because i read through all of this is one fell swoop and got a bit muddled with the details? I'll try... see below. Also, I'm going to seem like a rube for asking this, but what on Earth is HAM? Thanks to Balin for answering that This is my first time by the way Welcome!, and i did try the FAQs, but no luck! Anyway, I want in, I want to figure this out. I want this to be figured out too! Was the hole cut in the bear's belly in order to remove something? Yes. that the campers claimed was there? Yes - if you remove your 's' on the end of 'campers' ;-) is a bear hug relevant? No. were they, a camper and the wounded bear, involved in a sordid relationship of some sort? No! :-D (feel free to visualize me choking on my coffee and giggling like a teenager...!) are the bears unconsiouss because of something ingested? No. Not by direct means anyway... are the campers now out of the woods, so to speak? Yes. or will there be questions asked about their actions? Irrel. Adzlike has requested a recap, but it'll take me ages to summarize everything here. What I will do is to consolidate some of the responses and clarify what the present scene looks like: We began with the cryptic "A forest ranger satisfactorily surveyed the scene before him. His quick reasoning had paid off." The first recap was: "We are in a forest in present times. There is a ranger (who is on foot), more than one person (hikers - but not really relevant) and more than one bear. With the assistance of a person, the ranger (HAM) ultimately saves another person (HAM) from a bear. To save the person he had to do something/make something happen, resulting in one or more bears being stopped from what they were doing and possibly (but not relevant to the story) dying. In doing this you could say that he outsmarted someone. These bears were adult and dangerous, but can be assumed to be friendly towards each other" We now know that the ranger is looking at two bears, one male, one female, and two tourists/hikers/campers/people. The bears are both unconscious having been knocked out by the ranger. We also know that one person was in danger of the bears. The other person went to seek help from the ranger. The ranger chose not to believe something the person said, and in doing this, saved the other person's life. The female bear has a hole in her belly which was cut open by the ranger. We still know very little about the two people. We now know that one of them mysteriously could not have been called Bob however! The key to unlocking this story is in the backround information about the two people, and what happened exactly between them and the bears. There is enough information in this post to deduce what happened with the latter. Good luck - we're almost there! | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4878 Registered: 4-2010 |
*visualizes Namtip choking on his coffee and giggling like a teenager - giggles like a teenager himself...oh, wait, I am technically a teenager; oh well* The one who could not have been called Bob - is that because this person is female? Is "not-Bob" the person who went to get help from the ranger? The one who was in danger? Were the bears hungry? Did the hikers intend to do something in the forest? Hike? Camp? Picnic? Engage in a romantic tryst? Were the bears hungry? Did they feel endangered? | ||
| Lordofthegeeks1000 (Lordofthegeeks1000)
New member Username: Lordofthegeeks1000 Post Number: 34 Registered: 1-2010 |
Is he (the non-Bob) a specific, named person? Did the ranger choose not to believe that the bear had eaten something? Are they currently in the forest? Were the hikers related to each other? Are they in a relationship? Are the bears native to this particular forest? Have the hikers lived near the forest in the past? Was something removed from the female bear's stomach? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4895 Registered: 4-2010 |
LOTG, you do know you have a puzzle in Limbo, right? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 25 Registered: 5-2010 |
The one who could not have been called Bob - is that because this person is female? No. Is "not-Bob" the person who went to get help from the ranger? By 'not-Bob' do you mean the one who wouldn't have been called Bob? If so, then no. To clarify: The one who would not have been called Bob for a specific reason was in danger, and the other person/hiker/camper went to get help from the ranger The one who was in danger? They were both in danger, but the one who we haven't attempted to name yet managed to get help. Were the bears hungry? Yes! Did the hikers intend to do something in the forest? Hike? Camp? Picnic? Engage in a romantic tryst? Irrel. Were the bears hungry? Is there an echo in here?! Did they feel endangered? I doubt it. Is he (the non-Bob) a specific, named person? Neither of them are specific named people, (e.g. famous, who we would know). It's just that the hiker saved from the bear would not have been called Bob. If you can figure out why, then we'll be well on our way... ;-) Did the ranger choose not to believe that the bear had eaten something? You are so close it hurts! A slight rewording of this question will get us places. e.g. you say the bear, but which one are you talking about and what had he/she eaten? Are they currently in the forest? Yes. Were the hikers related to each other? No. Are they in a relationship? No. Are the bears native to this particular forest? Irrel. Have the hikers lived near the forest in the past? One of them definitely not. For the other it is irrelevant. Was something removed from the female bear's stomach? Yes, indeed! | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 321 Registered: 9-2009 |
Sorry to jump in, but I read the whole sequence of Q&As and couldn't resist to ask: are we looking at a Little Red Riding Hood - type of story? With the other hiker being (trapped) in one bear's belly? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 26 Registered: 5-2010 |
Sorry to jump in Welcome!, but I read the whole sequence of Q&As and couldn't resist to ask: are we looking at a Little Red Riding Hood - type of story? No. With the other hiker being (trapped) in one bear's belly? Yes, hooray! | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5030 Registered: 4-2010 |
So one hiker went to get help from the ranger, correct? Was the other hiker in the bear's belly at that time? Was the hiker eaten by the bear? Whole? Did the ranger knock out the bear before cutting her open? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 27 Registered: 5-2010 |
So one hiker went to get help from the ranger, correct? Yes. Was the other hiker in the bear's belly at that time? Yes. Was the hiker eaten by the bear? Yes. Whole? That he is alive now would seem to answer this as yes ;-) Did the ranger knock out the bear before cutting her open? Not really relevant to the story, but we can assume yes. How did the ranger 'outsmart' someone? Why could one of the hikers not have been called 'Bob'? Their background information is all we need to establish now, and soon this story will become clear... | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5298 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the "help" hiker the one outsmarted? Did this hiker have a plan to rescue the "in-bear" hiker? But it would have failed? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 28 Registered: 5-2010 |
Was the "help" hiker the one outsmarted? Yes. Did this hiker have a plan to rescue the "in-bear" hiker? No. But it would have failed? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5465 Registered: 4-2010 |
One of the hikers could not have been called Bob...hmmm.... Just as a reminder, is the "help" hiker H? A? M? Is the "in-bear" hiker H? A? M? | ||
| Lordofthegeeks1000 (Lordofthegeeks1000)
New member Username: Lordofthegeeks1000 Post Number: 35 Registered: 1-2010 |
Did the ranger tell the "help" hiker a lie, to make the hiker do something s/he would not normally do? Did the "help" hiker believe the wrong bear ate the "in-bear" hiker? And the forest ranger chose to believe it was the other one? Did the female bear eat the hiker? Yes Balin, I decided the puzzle wasn't really going anywhere, and it was a bit of a complicated rule, so I discontinued it... Sorry about not mentioning it. For future reference, how should I deal with an inactive puzzle? And sorry for the off-topic comments, Namtip. | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 29 Registered: 5-2010 |
Just as a reminder, is the "help" hiker H? A? M? Is the "in-bear" hiker H? A? M? Yes and yes. Did the ranger tell the "help" hiker a lie, to make the hiker do something s/he would not normally do? No. Did the "help" hiker believe the wrong bear ate the "in-bear" hiker? Yes! And the forest ranger chose to believe it was the other one? Yes! Did the female bear eat the hiker? Yes. Ok, so now we know that the 'help' hiker told the ranger about the fact that the male bear ate his friend. We also know that the ranger chose not to believe the 'help' hiker and opened up the female instead (after knocking both bears out - which isn't relevant to the story but makes it more plausible). Out pops the 'in bear' hiker thankfully still alive. (Ok, not so plausible, but hey, it makes a happy ending.) The only question now remaining is how the ranger knew not to believe the 'help' hiker and so open up the female first. The key to this is in the basic background information of one of the hikers ;-) | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5616 Registered: 4-2010 |
Are we looking for the background information of the "help" hiker? Of the "in-bear" hiker? Is this related to the reason that this one particular hiker could not be called Bob? LOTG - you can just place a post on the puzzle, or in the chatroom, asking a mod to delete it. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 1839 Registered: 7-2009 |
LOTG - you can also just post a sp0iler. | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 30 Registered: 5-2010 |
Are we looking for the background information of the "help" hiker? No. Background info of this hiker is irrelevant to the story. Of the "in-bear" hiker? Yes. Is this related to the reason that this one particular hiker could not be called Bob? Yes! | ||
| Kayleetonkslupin (Kayleetonkslupin)
New member Username: Kayleetonkslupin Post Number: 327 Registered: 9-2010 |
Was not-Bob female? Or perhaps not originally male? Or perhaps came from a culture where "Bob" wasn't a name? something like that? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 31 Registered: 5-2010 |
Was not-Bob female? As stated before 'not-Bob' is HAM (means Human, Adult, Male ;-)), so no, he is male. Or perhaps not originally male? Not this. Or perhaps came from a culture where "Bob" wasn't a name? Yes. something like that? Yes. | ||
| Kayleetonkslupin (Kayleetonkslupin)
New member Username: Kayleetonkslupin Post Number: 331 Registered: 9-2010 |
I thought not-Bob had been confirmed as HAM, but I must have missed that post on my quick re-read, so I was just checking. Is not-Bob from Asia? Africa? Middle East? South America? Europe (in a non-English speaking country) Mexico perhaps? (I figured it was better to say Mexico than North America, as 2/3 of North America is English speaking, except...) Is he from Quebec, Canada? I'd say Antarctica, but he's not a penguin (unfortunately) | ||
| Lordofthegeeks1000 (Lordofthegeeks1000)
New member Username: Lordofthegeeks1000 Post Number: 36 Registered: 1-2010 |
Did the ranger think that the female bear would have been the only one of the two bears to prefer the taste of the hiker's particular ethnicity? (Just joking...) Is a physical charactersitic of the rescued hiker's culture relevant? The language that culture speaks? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 32 Registered: 5-2010 |
Is not-Bob from Asia? Africa? Middle East? South America? Europe This. (in a non-English speaking country) Mexico perhaps? (I figured it was better to say Mexico than North America, as 2/3 of North America is English speaking, except...) Is he from Quebec, Canada? I'd say Antarctica, but he's not a penguin (unfortunately) Did the ranger think that the female bear would have been the only one of the two bears to prefer the taste of the hiker's particular ethnicity? No. (Just joking...) Is a physical charactersitic of the rescued hiker's culture relevant? No. The language that culture speaks? No. We need the specific country that not-Bob comes from. All else is irrelevant. Once we know this country, I will allow one or two guesses as to how the ranger knew which bear to open first and why, and then I'll post the grand finale...! | ||
| Kayleetonkslupin (Kayleetonkslupin)
New member Username: Kayleetonkslupin Post Number: 367 Registered: 9-2010 |
Okay...narrowing it down further... Nordic countries? Western Europe? Southern Europe? Central Europe? Eastern Europe? Southeastern Europe? ( http://sheppardsoftware.com/country_europe_GL_click.html regions divided up this way) | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 538 Registered: 9-2009 |
Do we have a LTPF list of European countries? :=) Failing that, is he from: Iceland? UK? Sweden? Norway? Denmark? Finland? The Netherlands? Belgium? Portugal? Spain? France? Monaco? Italy? Andorra? San Marino? Vatican? Luxembourg? Switzerland? Liechtenstein? Germany? Austria? The Czech Republic? Slovakia? Poland? Russia? The Baltic states? One of the countries in the former Yugoslavia? Greece? Turkey? Cyprus? Malta? Albania? Bulgaria? Hungary? Romania? Russia? Ukraine? Belarus? Moldova? Armenia? I might've missed some of them in the process, but hopefully managed to get the right one. | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 33 Registered: 5-2010 |
Okay...narrowing it down further... Nordic countries? Western Europe? Southern Europe? Central Europe? This... Eastern Europe? ...although some think it as this. Southeastern Europe? Do we have a LTPF What is LTPF??! list of European countries? :=) Failing that, is he from: Iceland? UK? Sweden? Norway? Denmark? Finland? The Netherlands? Belgium? Portugal? Spain? France? Monaco? Italy? Andorra? San Marino? Vatican? Luxembourg? Switzerland? Liechtenstein? Germany? Austria? The Czech Republic? This. Slovakia? Poland? Russia? The Baltic states? One of the countries in the former Yugoslavia? Greece? Turkey? Cyprus? Malta? Albania? Bulgaria? Hungary? Romania? Russia? Ukraine? Belarus? Moldova? Armenia? I might've missed some of them in the process, but hopefully managed to get the right one. Ok, so not-Bob is from the Czech Republic. ('Bob' is not a Czech name, so let's call him Pavel, and while we're at it, let's call the 'help' hiker John. These names have nothing to do with the story however...) I'll leave this open now until the weekend as to how the ranger knew not to believe John and open up the female first. Remember, this has nothing to do with culture, beliefs, ideologies, stereotypes, or anything else. We have here already all the information we need to deduce the solution! The next time you hear from me is when I either name the winner, or post the answer! Good luck! | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 553 Registered: 9-2009 |
You don't have an email in your profile, so I cannot email a potential $poiler. I'll ask a more lateral question and if the answer is yes I will keep quiet afterwards: Are money and trustworthiness relevant? | ||
| Kayleetonkslupin (Kayleetonkslupin)
New member Username: Kayleetonkslupin Post Number: 373 Registered: 9-2010 |
"LTPF" is this board, the Lateral Thinking Puzzles Forum. When someone asks/suggests "LTPF list of (whatever)" they're really saying "assuming there is a list of every single thing falling under category of (whatever), which is it?" So if someone says, for a common example, "LTPF list of continents" then (if you are so inclined) you might disclose which of the seven continents, if any, are relevant. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5782 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is a pun relevant? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 34 Registered: 5-2010 |
You don't have an email in your profile, so I cannot email a potential $poiler. You're right. I'll get on to that... I'll ask a more lateral question and if the answer is yes I will keep quiet afterwards: Are money and trustworthiness relevant? Yes! But email me the $poiler anyway... Thanks Kayleetonkslupin for the explanation. Is a pun relevant? Yes! | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 586 Registered: 9-2009 |
emailed | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 2105 Registered: 3-2006 |
Hahah! Got it too! Love it! How did I miss this? I guess it was hiding among some solved puzzles. Only fair to let Rbruma do the honours ... ? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5951 Registered: 4-2010 |
Something like "Men never take Czechs" (as a pun on checks/cash/credit")? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 6022 Registered: 4-2010 |
Or "Only women handle Czechs"? | ||
| Namtip (Namtip)
New member Username: Namtip Post Number: 35 Registered: 5-2010 |
************* SPOILER ************** Wow, good work guys. I never thought it'd last this long. After I originally heard the story, I partially forgot it and did a search on the internet to find it again. I couldn't find it anywhere. So in the end I emailed my friend to resend me the story. I thought it would make a good lateral puzzle. Congratulations go to Rbruma for getting the solution first and emailing it to me. The story goes like this: An American [or any nationality can be used here] was walking in a forest with an old friend - a Czech. Catching up on the old times, they were suddenly startled by the roaring of two bears from behind. They spun around to see what looked like a female and a male that hadn't eaten in days. Suddenly, one of the bears pounced on the Czech and swallowed him whole. Before the other bear could move, the American ran away as fast as he could. Around the corner, he bumped into our forest ranger and screamed: "A bear has just eaten my Czech friend...". Peering around the corner, the ranger asked him which one had eaten him. The American replied: "I think it was the male, it ate him whole and he must still be inside!!". The ranger ran up to the two bears and ripped the belly of the female open (after knocking them both out with Chuck Norris roundhouse punches to the head). Out fell the poor Czech, who, luckily, was still alive. When the American caught up with the ranger he asked: "Wow, how did you know that he was in the other bear?" To that the ranger replied: "Son, never ever trust a man when he says that the Czech's in the male!" Thank you all for contributing, I hope you all enjoyed doing it as much as I did. Thanks also go to my friend Hana (who is Czech!) for telling me this joke! | ||
| Hana_czech (Hana_czech)
New member Username: Hana_czech Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2010 |
:DDD well now, I hope "my check is in the mail" :D | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 6236 Registered: 4-2010 |
All right - nice puzzle! Can't wait to Czech out your next one! |
