that there is something such that it is not mitral and it is an annoyance is false.
sent1: if the Merlot is thankless then the theosophist does lather sulfate. sent2: the theosophist does not fornicate and is thankless if the place-kicker lathers sulfate. sent3: if the spinmeister is non-mitral the Merlot is not an annoyance but it is non-mitral. sent4: there exists something such that it is a kind of woody a marsupial. sent5: the theosophist is three-dimensional. sent6: the fact that if the place-kicker is mitral that the spinmeister is thankless is not incorrect is correct. sent7: if something does not fornicate but it is thankless it is a vernix. sent8: something is three-dimensional and it is a bath. sent9: the Merlot is mitral if the spinmeister is thankless. sent10: the spinmeister is a kind of non-mitral an annoyance if the place-kicker is a kind of a vernix. sent11: if the Merlot is not thankless then the place-kicker does not fornicate but it is thankless. sent12: the fact that the Merlot does not lather sulfate hold. sent13: if a three-dimensional thing is a bath the theosophist does not lather sulfate.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Merlot is thankless.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the theosophist lathers sulfate.; sent8 & sent13 -> int2: the theosophist does not lather sulfate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the Merlot is not thankless.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the place-kicker does not fornicate but it is thankless.; sent7 -> int6: the place-kicker is a vernix if it does not fornicate and it is not grateful.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the place-kicker is a vernix.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the spinmeister is not mitral but an annoyance.; int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that it is not mitral and it is an annoyance is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Merlot is thankless then the theosophist does lather sulfate. sent2: the theosophist does not fornicate and is thankless if the place-kicker lathers sulfate. sent3: if the spinmeister is non-mitral the Merlot is not an annoyance but it is non-mitral. sent4: there exists something such that it is a kind of woody a marsupial. sent5: the theosophist is three-dimensional. sent6: the fact that if the place-kicker is mitral that the spinmeister is thankless is not incorrect is correct. sent7: if something does not fornicate but it is thankless it is a vernix. sent8: something is three-dimensional and it is a bath. sent9: the Merlot is mitral if the spinmeister is thankless. sent10: the spinmeister is a kind of non-mitral an annoyance if the place-kicker is a kind of a vernix. sent11: if the Merlot is not thankless then the place-kicker does not fornicate but it is thankless. sent12: the fact that the Merlot does not lather sulfate hold. sent13: if a three-dimensional thing is a bath the theosophist does not lather sulfate. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Merlot is thankless.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the theosophist lathers sulfate.; sent8 & sent13 -> int2: the theosophist does not lather sulfate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the Merlot is not thankless.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the place-kicker does not fornicate but it is thankless.; sent7 -> int6: the place-kicker is a vernix if it does not fornicate and it is not grateful.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the place-kicker is a vernix.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the spinmeister is not mitral but an annoyance.; int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__