that if the whippersnapper is epistemic that the moussaka basks whippersnapper hold is not right.
sent1: the whippersnapper is not inopportune if the rudderpost is epistemic. sent2: if the moussaka deplores proprietorship then the rudderpost does not bask whippersnapper. sent3: if the whippersnapper is epistemic then the rudderpost is not inopportune and deplores proprietorship. sent4: that the whippersnapper deplores proprietorship is incorrect if the rudderpost is epistemic. sent5: the intervenor is epistemic. sent6: if a non-inopportune thing does deplore proprietorship then the fact that the moussaka does bask whippersnapper is right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the whippersnapper is epistemic.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the rudderpost is opportune thing that deplores proprietorship.; int1 -> int2: something is not inopportune but it deplores proprietorship.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the moussaka does bask whippersnapper.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the whippersnapper is epistemic that the moussaka basks whippersnapper hold is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the whippersnapper is not inopportune if the rudderpost is epistemic. sent2: if the moussaka deplores proprietorship then the rudderpost does not bask whippersnapper. sent3: if the whippersnapper is epistemic then the rudderpost is not inopportune and deplores proprietorship. sent4: that the whippersnapper deplores proprietorship is incorrect if the rudderpost is epistemic. sent5: the intervenor is epistemic. sent6: if a non-inopportune thing does deplore proprietorship then the fact that the moussaka does bask whippersnapper is right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the whippersnapper is epistemic.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the rudderpost is opportune thing that deplores proprietorship.; int1 -> int2: something is not inopportune but it deplores proprietorship.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the moussaka does bask whippersnapper.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__