the Cheviots does achromatize cotter.
sent1: the sap is not a danewort. sent2: if the acetylation is a kind of a sorus that does gate spicemill the Cheviots is not a wringer. sent3: something is not a taper or it is a crowbait or both. sent4: if something that does achromatize queasiness is avionics that it does not achromatize cotter is not wrong. sent5: the sap is not a danewort and it is not a Cagliostro. sent6: something is not a wringer if it does achromatize queasiness and it is a sorus. sent7: the Cheviots is avionics if something does not taper or it is a crowbait or both. sent8: the acetylation is a sorus. sent9: if the Cheviots is not a kind of a wringer it achromatizes queasiness. sent10: if the fact that the acetylation does not gate spicemill is true then the fact that the sap is not a kind of a danewort and it is not a Cagliostro is incorrect. sent11: the fact that the fact that the sap is a danewort but it is not a Cagliostro is not false is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the acetylation does not gate spicemill is not incorrect.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the sap is not a danewort and it is not a Cagliostro is not right.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the acetylation does gate spicemill.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the acetylation is a sorus and it does gate spicemill.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the Cheviots is not a wringer.; int5 & sent9 -> int6: the Cheviots achromatizes queasiness.; sent3 & sent7 -> int7: the Cheviots is avionics.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the Cheviots achromatizes queasiness and it is avionics.; sent4 -> int9: the Cheviots does not achromatize cotter if it does achromatize queasiness and is avionics.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the Cheviots does achromatize cotter. ; $context$ = sent1: the sap is not a danewort. sent2: if the acetylation is a kind of a sorus that does gate spicemill the Cheviots is not a wringer. sent3: something is not a taper or it is a crowbait or both. sent4: if something that does achromatize queasiness is avionics that it does not achromatize cotter is not wrong. sent5: the sap is not a danewort and it is not a Cagliostro. sent6: something is not a wringer if it does achromatize queasiness and it is a sorus. sent7: the Cheviots is avionics if something does not taper or it is a crowbait or both. sent8: the acetylation is a sorus. sent9: if the Cheviots is not a kind of a wringer it achromatizes queasiness. sent10: if the fact that the acetylation does not gate spicemill is true then the fact that the sap is not a kind of a danewort and it is not a Cagliostro is incorrect. sent11: the fact that the fact that the sap is a danewort but it is not a Cagliostro is not false is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the acetylation does not gate spicemill is not incorrect.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the sap is not a danewort and it is not a Cagliostro is not right.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the acetylation does gate spicemill.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the acetylation is a sorus and it does gate spicemill.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the Cheviots is not a wringer.; int5 & sent9 -> int6: the Cheviots achromatizes queasiness.; sent3 & sent7 -> int7: the Cheviots is avionics.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the Cheviots achromatizes queasiness and it is avionics.; sent4 -> int9: the Cheviots does not achromatize cotter if it does achromatize queasiness and is avionics.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__