that the fact that the idolatress is not a bier and is not a kind of a provincial is not correct if the fact that the watercolor patronages exponentiation hold is wrong.
sent1: the fact that the stainer does patronage exponentiation is correct. sent2: the idolatress does not patronage exponentiation if the fact that the watercolor is a bier but it is not a petrochemical does not hold. sent3: if that the idolatress is not a bier is true the fact that the revisionist is both not a bier and a provincial is not right. sent4: if the stainer is not a kind of a Cousteau the revisionist is not a bier. sent5: if the revisionist is not a bier that the idolatress is not a kind of a bier and is not provincial is incorrect. sent6: if the stainer is a kind of a Cousteau that it hurtles and it is not a petrochemical is false. sent7: the revisionist is a Cousteau. sent8: if that the stainer hurtles but it is not a kind of a petrochemical does not hold then the watercolor does not patronage exponentiation. sent9: if the revisionist is not a bier then the idolatress is both not a bier and not a provincial. sent10: the idolatress does not patronage exponentiation. sent11: the fact that that the revisionist is not a Cousteau and it is not a bier is not wrong is not correct if the stainer is not a kind of a Cousteau. sent12: that the stainer does hurtle and is a petrochemical is false if it is a Cousteau. sent13: if something does not patronage exponentiation and/or is not a bier then it does not patronage exponentiation. sent14: if the stainer is not a provincial the idolatress is not a Cousteau.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the watercolor does patronage exponentiation.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stainer is a kind of a Cousteau.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the stainer hurtles but it is not a petrochemical does not hold.; sent8 & int1 -> int2: the watercolor does not patronage exponentiation.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the stainer is not a Cousteau.; sent4 & int4 -> int5: the revisionist is not a bier.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the idolatress is not a bier and it is not a kind of a provincial is not true.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the forelock does not patronage exponentiation.
sent13 -> int7: the forelock does not patronage exponentiation if it does not patronage exponentiation or it is not a kind of a bier or both.;
$hypothesis$ = that the fact that the idolatress is not a bier and is not a kind of a provincial is not correct if the fact that the watercolor patronages exponentiation hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the stainer does patronage exponentiation is correct. sent2: the idolatress does not patronage exponentiation if the fact that the watercolor is a bier but it is not a petrochemical does not hold. sent3: if that the idolatress is not a bier is true the fact that the revisionist is both not a bier and a provincial is not right. sent4: if the stainer is not a kind of a Cousteau the revisionist is not a bier. sent5: if the revisionist is not a bier that the idolatress is not a kind of a bier and is not provincial is incorrect. sent6: if the stainer is a kind of a Cousteau that it hurtles and it is not a petrochemical is false. sent7: the revisionist is a Cousteau. sent8: if that the stainer hurtles but it is not a kind of a petrochemical does not hold then the watercolor does not patronage exponentiation. sent9: if the revisionist is not a bier then the idolatress is both not a bier and not a provincial. sent10: the idolatress does not patronage exponentiation. sent11: the fact that that the revisionist is not a Cousteau and it is not a bier is not wrong is not correct if the stainer is not a kind of a Cousteau. sent12: that the stainer does hurtle and is a petrochemical is false if it is a Cousteau. sent13: if something does not patronage exponentiation and/or is not a bier then it does not patronage exponentiation. sent14: if the stainer is not a provincial the idolatress is not a Cousteau. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the watercolor does patronage exponentiation.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stainer is a kind of a Cousteau.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the stainer hurtles but it is not a petrochemical does not hold.; sent8 & int1 -> int2: the watercolor does not patronage exponentiation.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the stainer is not a Cousteau.; sent4 & int4 -> int5: the revisionist is not a bier.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the idolatress is not a bier and it is not a kind of a provincial is not true.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__