Anthony Snyder's Home Page



This is a hobby website, where I share some of my opinions.

As I tend to treat all things as puzzles, my views come across a bit differently to most. I am very interested in feedback from anyone that agrees or disagrees with any of the things I say.

Regardless, I hope you enjoy the reading...

My Hobby Web Sites


(my new awareness site)

Are You Logical?

(how I view logic and the human mind)

Cube Solving Hobby

(my Rubik's Cube solving methods and opinions)

Virtual Causality Theory

(theory for existence)

Toggleverse Theory

(my argument for a multi-state universe rather than a quantum multiverse)


(a few noteworthy pictures and info about my past)

Cancer Research Notes

(I did some research on cancer and produced this page in response to people asking me what to do about their cancers.)

Sponsor My Research

(I'm looking for sponsors and donations)

Flat Earth?

(This theory is far more intriguing than intuition suggests, I'd give it a read before putting down Flat Earther's.)

If you have any comments or questions about any of my websites, please send them to

My claim is that I independently arrived at these theories through my own deductions and believe some of them to be vital in helping people to deal with the world around them. Tools for rational thought are used to figure these things out. However, many people will lump rational thought with mainstream opinion, so to them it may seem strange that I spend most of my time as the rebel opposing mainstream opinion, yet simultaneously claim to be a rational critical thinker. Though in many cases rational thinking and mainstream opinion do go hand-in-hand, it is not always the case. Mainstream opinion is heavily biased by corporate interests, by cultural and religious assumptions, by hidden political agendas, and by ordinary human emotions interfering with the various processes by which we gain and apply knowledge. To make matters worse we live under a legal system/process that serves as a 10 lane freeway for the use of railroading tactics.

Figuring it all out for yourself is what's important. If you rely on others to figure it out for you then you'll likely adopt their assumptions without realizing it. Instead, when I research a topic I dig for the clues that others noticed, and I dig for the clues that others did not notice. I always take what others say as a suggestion only, and then build up my own theories from there.

Through this process I have discovered a serious psychological phenomenon that gets in the way. I call it dependent thought validation. Oftentimes people seem unable to accept the possibility that something they think through could be true without first validating it through specific trusted 3rd parties (father, teacher, friend, leader, etc.).

This psychological phenonemon results in a web that effectively blocks ideas that go against the grain, from spreading.

Of the people that come up with new break-through ideas, most do not think through their ideas rationally. They are easily discounted or discredited. Then of the ones that remain, most drop their idea for one reason or another (examples: insufficient time in their schedule, pursuit of the idea may interfere with reputation, pursuit of the idea may require dropping relationships or other things important to them, etc.).

And of those that remain, most were dropped because of dependent thought validation. You get the idea, it fits right in your mind, you talk about it with people, they shoot it down with all sorts of mainstream or cultural generalizations that sound correct, you lose your confidence, seriously reducing the possibility that you pursue the idea further. The point is that you do not know one way or another based on nonsense, even nonsense disguised as common sense. If you really want to find out whether or not you are right, you have to apply deductive reasoning to the clues. Dig and persevere until you get your answer.

It is easy to rationalize that an idea was both thought of and tested already by thousands of other people, when in all likelihood only the former was true. The point is that you can think of something that goes against the grain, and then easily write it off instead of checking it out. And this is often due to dependent thought validation.

You may go through all the rational steps of sorting through the clues and coming up with a conclusion or a sound theory, yet cannot accept it due to this phenomenon. It takes more than just the tools for rational thought to do so. You must gain the psychological quality that I call self-validated thought. It means that once you have rationally proven to yourself that something is true or plausible, that you can then accept it as true or plausible without having to first validate it through someone else.

If you are inexperienced at critical thinking then dependent thought validation makes sense for a while, to test your new found skills against those of others more experienced than yourself. However, if your thinking is solid, then you should let go of dependent thought validation just like you should let go of the training wheels on a bike.

Mainstream will tell you to never let go, under the notion that real knowledge requires a consensus of expert opinion. However, this idea is only good in theory. In practice you have all sorts of issues that get in the way: presentation, time, motivation, subconscious bias, money, hidden agenda, superiors pushing you down a different path, priorities, etc. Consensus can work if setup in such a way as to shed off all those tangents. This is not easy. So don't depend on it.

The manipulators of knowledge are at the very top of the food chain. These are the people we should actually be at war with. Not terrorists. Not other countries. (There are better ways to deal with those issues.) Knowledge manipulators are the ones responsible for most of the problems in this world (by causing them directly, indirectly, and by hiding the solutions).

The thought validation web makes possible their control of more minds automatically.

Self-validated thinking is absolutely necessary to anyone wishing to rise above a world filled with heavily biased knowledge and procedure, cultures and religions that promote irrational thinking, governments and corporations that manufacture false truths to cover hidden agendas, and legal systems that function as tools to manipulate.

Just about every motivation imaginable follows a sort of "current" along the lines of the thought validation web. Go against this current to get all the subtle details of society working against you.

Aliens & UFOs: I will soon start a new hobby website inviting debates on various questions regarding aliens. Examples: do they exist? What is the percentage chance that an alien race that visits Earth is peaceful? Violent? What is the percentage chance that they are here now? And what is the best publically available proof that they are/were here?

Until then feel free to enjoy this video, where the Defense Minister of Canada makes clear his views on the subject: video

Due to a high volume of both low quality and hoax sightings, to save time it is best to conduct research through organizations that have already painstakingly weeded those out.

Here is one that I found of high quality, plus it provides an anonymous service for those that have had sightings yet do not wish to be identified for fear of hurting their reputation:

This one I have followed for many years. A great deal of effort has gone into seeking out and documenting testimonies from high ranking credible military officials:

I have a lot of opinions of my own that I will share at my new site, once I have the time to create it.