that the hyperventilation is non-pessimistic thing that does not command junction is not correct.
sent1: that the hyperventilation is a kind of non-experiential a Frisian is not true. sent2: that something is not two-wheel and is not a clamor is not true if it is a kind of a dynamism. sent3: if something is biographic then it is a kind of a Durio. sent4: the fact that the demonstrator is not a kind of a molding and does risk pawnbroker is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the mahoe is a kind of a quarter-tone is not false if the fact that it is non-two-wheel thing that is not a avowal is not true. sent6: the hyperventilation is a dynamism. sent7: the ripcord is two-wheel if that the crape is two-wheel but not a clamor is not correct. sent8: that the hyperventilation is a kind of non-pessimistic thing that does command junction does not hold. sent9: if the hyperventilation does officiate then the fact that it is not non-two-wheel is not false. sent10: if something is unobvious that it does stable republican is not incorrect. sent11: the hyperventilation is not a kind of a clamor if it is two-wheel and/or it is unobvious. sent12: if there exists something such that it stables republican then the jiqui is pessimistic and is biographic. sent13: that the takeaway is a kind of a dynamism but it does not reproach is incorrect. sent14: if the hyperventilation is a dynamism then it is a clamor. sent15: if the ripcord is two-wheel then that the iodination is unobvious hold. sent16: if something stables republican then it is biographic. sent17: something is unobvious if the fact that it is not non-biographic hold. sent18: if the fact that the hyperventilation is not pessimistic and does not command junction is not correct then it stables republican. sent19: if that the takeaway is a dynamism but it is not a reproach does not hold then the crape is a dynamism. sent20: the hyperventilation is not a kind of a knit and it is not a trypsinogen.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the hyperventilation is not pessimistic and does not command junction is false.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the hyperventilation stables republican.; sent16 -> int2: the hyperventilation is not non-biographic if it does stable republican.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the hyperventilation is biographic.; sent17 -> int4: if the hyperventilation is biographic then it is unobvious.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the hyperventilation is unobvious.; int5 -> int6: the hyperventilation is two-wheel and/or it is not obvious.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the hyperventilation does not clamor.; sent14 & sent6 -> int8: that the hyperventilation is a kind of a clamor is correct.; int7 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> hypothesis;
that the hyperventilation is not a Durio and it is not a clamor is incorrect.
sent3 -> int10: the jiqui is a Durio if it is biographic.;
$hypothesis$ = that the hyperventilation is non-pessimistic thing that does not command junction is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that the hyperventilation is a kind of non-experiential a Frisian is not true. sent2: that something is not two-wheel and is not a clamor is not true if it is a kind of a dynamism. sent3: if something is biographic then it is a kind of a Durio. sent4: the fact that the demonstrator is not a kind of a molding and does risk pawnbroker is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the mahoe is a kind of a quarter-tone is not false if the fact that it is non-two-wheel thing that is not a avowal is not true. sent6: the hyperventilation is a dynamism. sent7: the ripcord is two-wheel if that the crape is two-wheel but not a clamor is not correct. sent8: that the hyperventilation is a kind of non-pessimistic thing that does command junction does not hold. sent9: if the hyperventilation does officiate then the fact that it is not non-two-wheel is not false. sent10: if something is unobvious that it does stable republican is not incorrect. sent11: the hyperventilation is not a kind of a clamor if it is two-wheel and/or it is unobvious. sent12: if there exists something such that it stables republican then the jiqui is pessimistic and is biographic. sent13: that the takeaway is a kind of a dynamism but it does not reproach is incorrect. sent14: if the hyperventilation is a dynamism then it is a clamor. sent15: if the ripcord is two-wheel then that the iodination is unobvious hold. sent16: if something stables republican then it is biographic. sent17: something is unobvious if the fact that it is not non-biographic hold. sent18: if the fact that the hyperventilation is not pessimistic and does not command junction is not correct then it stables republican. sent19: if that the takeaway is a dynamism but it is not a reproach does not hold then the crape is a dynamism. sent20: the hyperventilation is not a kind of a knit and it is not a trypsinogen. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the hyperventilation is not pessimistic and does not command junction is false.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the hyperventilation stables republican.; sent16 -> int2: the hyperventilation is not non-biographic if it does stable republican.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the hyperventilation is biographic.; sent17 -> int4: if the hyperventilation is biographic then it is unobvious.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the hyperventilation is unobvious.; int5 -> int6: the hyperventilation is two-wheel and/or it is not obvious.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the hyperventilation does not clamor.; sent14 & sent6 -> int8: that the hyperventilation is a kind of a clamor is correct.; int7 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__