Moberly, Missouri: All known cities in the area have been built above ground and do not contain giants. An 1885 story about a fantastic "buried city" located 360 feet beneath the town of Moberly, Missouri, is making the rounds again. It has all the necessary ingredients to be incorporated into the modern mythology of giants: giant skeletons, lost technology, a cover-up by government scientists, a complete lack of credibility, etc. The most recent re-telling of this story that I have seen is by Kristan Harris. You can read the text and watch him explain on video why he thinks this story is so important.
The Moberly tale seems like such an obvious hoax to me that I don't find it that interesting. As far as I know, there isn't a single shred of physical evidence to back it up. The whole thing reads from beginning to end like a fabrication, and I'm surprised that anyone would take it seriously. A regular reader of this blog (who asked to remain unidentified) made me aware of the following series of articles written in 2014 by a writer (D. Craig Asbury) from The Moberly Monitor-Index:
The Moberly tale seems like such an obvious hoax to me that I don't find it that interesting. As far as I know, there isn't a single shred of physical evidence to back it up. The whole thing reads from beginning to end like a fabrication, and I'm surprised that anyone would take it seriously. A regular reader of this blog (who asked to remain unidentified) made me aware of the following series of articles written in 2014 by a writer (D. Craig Asbury) from The Moberly Monitor-Index:
- Forgotten History Around Moberly: Moberly's Ancient Underground City - Part 1 of 5
- Forgotten History Around Moberly: Moberly's Ancient Underground City - Part 2 of 5
- Forgotten History Around Moberly: Moberly's Ancient Underground City - Part 3 of 5
- Forgotten History Around Moberly: Moberly's Ancient Underground City - Part 4 of 5
- Forgotten History Around Moberly: Moberly's Ancient Underground City - Part 5 of 5
People who want to embrace this story as "evidence" of anything should take some time to read what Asbury put together. Parts 4 and 5 contain some details about the how story came about, as well as what can only be called a printed admission of fabrication that ran in the Logansport, Indiana, Daily Pharos (April 11, 1885):
"Chicago, April 11 – The press dispatch from St. Louis Wednesday last, purported to give an account of the discovery of a subterranean city in Moberly, Mo., created great excitement in historical circles of this city, and many inquiries were made as to its authenticity. A dispatch was sent to Mr. Kelly, editor of The Monitor at Moberly, as to the whether the alleged discovery was true or false. In reply Mr. Kelly wires the United Press as follows: “The story is an April hoax. Not a word of truth in it.”"
Does that count as a retraction?
"Chicago, April 11 – The press dispatch from St. Louis Wednesday last, purported to give an account of the discovery of a subterranean city in Moberly, Mo., created great excitement in historical circles of this city, and many inquiries were made as to its authenticity. A dispatch was sent to Mr. Kelly, editor of The Monitor at Moberly, as to the whether the alleged discovery was true or false. In reply Mr. Kelly wires the United Press as follows: “The story is an April hoax. Not a word of truth in it.”"
Does that count as a retraction?
Update (5/16/2015): Craig Asbury sent me three more printed retractions of the Moberly hoax.
RSS Feed
