the treacle does pin Apeldoorn.
sent1: that the microscopist exclaims microphone is right if it does not eliminate hydrogen. sent2: the fact that the fact that the custard does not pin provider or does not exclaim pungency or both is not right is not wrong if it is not bubonic. sent3: the dimity is a catamountain if that the custard does not pin provider and/or does not exclaim pungency is incorrect. sent4: that the dimity exclaims pungency but it does not exclaim microphone is false. sent5: the custard is not bubonic. sent6: a catamountain that does exclaim microphone does not hypnotize check. sent7: the microscopist does not exclaim microphone if the fact that the dimity does exclaim pungency but it does not exclaim microphone is not correct. sent8: the treacle does not pin Apeldoorn if that the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen and it does not hypnotize check is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen and it does not hypnotize check.; assump1 -> int1: the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the microscopist does exclaim microphone.; sent7 & sent4 -> int3: the microscopist does not exclaim microphone.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the fact that the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen and does not hypnotize check is not wrong is not right.; int5 & sent8 -> hypothesis;
the treacle pins Apeldoorn.
sent6 -> int6: the dimity does not hypnotize check if it is a catamountain that exclaims microphone.; sent2 & sent5 -> int7: that the custard does not pin provider and/or it does not exclaim pungency is not right.; sent3 & int7 -> int8: the dimity is a catamountain.;
$hypothesis$ = the treacle does pin Apeldoorn. ; $context$ = sent1: that the microscopist exclaims microphone is right if it does not eliminate hydrogen. sent2: the fact that the fact that the custard does not pin provider or does not exclaim pungency or both is not right is not wrong if it is not bubonic. sent3: the dimity is a catamountain if that the custard does not pin provider and/or does not exclaim pungency is incorrect. sent4: that the dimity exclaims pungency but it does not exclaim microphone is false. sent5: the custard is not bubonic. sent6: a catamountain that does exclaim microphone does not hypnotize check. sent7: the microscopist does not exclaim microphone if the fact that the dimity does exclaim pungency but it does not exclaim microphone is not correct. sent8: the treacle does not pin Apeldoorn if that the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen and it does not hypnotize check is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen and it does not hypnotize check.; assump1 -> int1: the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the microscopist does exclaim microphone.; sent7 & sent4 -> int3: the microscopist does not exclaim microphone.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the fact that the microscopist does not eliminate hydrogen and does not hypnotize check is not wrong is not right.; int5 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__