the lanseh is a bovine.
sent1: there exists something such that it is not digital or it is non-bovine or both. sent2: something is not a bovine if that it is resistless and/or it is jurisprudential is incorrect. sent3: if the lanseh is not non-digital the fact that the shaker either does not unbutton fascination or is not antigenic or both is wrong. sent4: if the fact that something is not resistless or it is jurisprudential or both is false then it is not a bovine. sent5: if something is not jurisprudential then that it is not digital and it is not a telepathy is not incorrect. sent6: something is syntactic if it is not disorderly. sent7: the fact that the fact that the lanseh is not resistless or is jurisprudential or both is not correct is correct if it is not digital. sent8: the fact that if the shaker is not digital and it is not a kind of a telepathy the lanseh is bovine is not wrong. sent9: the tonsil is not a telepathy if there exists something such that that it does not unbutton fascination or it is not antigenic or both is not true. sent10: if the fact that something is syntactic or it is a telepathy or both is wrong it is non-digital. sent11: if the fact that the translation does not tusk Pylodictus or it does not unbutton arrogance or both is not true then the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus. sent12: the fact that something is syntactic and is resistless is wrong if it does not tusk Pylodictus. sent13: that the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus but it is disorderly is not right. sent14: if that something does not tusk Pylodictus and is disorderly is wrong then it is not non-syntactic. sent15: the tonsil is a telepathy if it is syntactic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lanseh is digital.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the fact that either the shaker does not unbutton fascination or it is not antigenic or both is not correct is not incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it does not unbutton fascination and/or it is not antigenic is not right.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the tonsil is not a telepathy.; sent14 -> int4: if that that the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus and is disorderly is right is not true it is syntactic.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the tonsil is syntactic.; sent15 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the tonsil is a telepathy hold.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the lanseh is not digital.; int8 & sent7 -> int9: the fact that the lanseh either is resistible or is not non-jurisprudential or both is wrong.; sent4 -> int10: the lanseh is not a bovine if that either it is not resistless or it is jurisprudential or both is false.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the lanseh is bovine.
sent5 -> int11: the shaker is not digital and not a telepathy if that it is not jurisprudential is not incorrect.; sent12 -> int12: if the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus then the fact that it is syntactic and it is not resistible does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the lanseh is a bovine. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is not digital or it is non-bovine or both. sent2: something is not a bovine if that it is resistless and/or it is jurisprudential is incorrect. sent3: if the lanseh is not non-digital the fact that the shaker either does not unbutton fascination or is not antigenic or both is wrong. sent4: if the fact that something is not resistless or it is jurisprudential or both is false then it is not a bovine. sent5: if something is not jurisprudential then that it is not digital and it is not a telepathy is not incorrect. sent6: something is syntactic if it is not disorderly. sent7: the fact that the fact that the lanseh is not resistless or is jurisprudential or both is not correct is correct if it is not digital. sent8: the fact that if the shaker is not digital and it is not a kind of a telepathy the lanseh is bovine is not wrong. sent9: the tonsil is not a telepathy if there exists something such that that it does not unbutton fascination or it is not antigenic or both is not true. sent10: if the fact that something is syntactic or it is a telepathy or both is wrong it is non-digital. sent11: if the fact that the translation does not tusk Pylodictus or it does not unbutton arrogance or both is not true then the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus. sent12: the fact that something is syntactic and is resistless is wrong if it does not tusk Pylodictus. sent13: that the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus but it is disorderly is not right. sent14: if that something does not tusk Pylodictus and is disorderly is wrong then it is not non-syntactic. sent15: the tonsil is a telepathy if it is syntactic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lanseh is digital.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the fact that either the shaker does not unbutton fascination or it is not antigenic or both is not correct is not incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it does not unbutton fascination and/or it is not antigenic is not right.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the tonsil is not a telepathy.; sent14 -> int4: if that that the tonsil does not tusk Pylodictus and is disorderly is right is not true it is syntactic.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the tonsil is syntactic.; sent15 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the tonsil is a telepathy hold.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the lanseh is not digital.; int8 & sent7 -> int9: the fact that the lanseh either is resistible or is not non-jurisprudential or both is wrong.; sent4 -> int10: the lanseh is not a bovine if that either it is not resistless or it is jurisprudential or both is false.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__