the butternut is a footfault.
sent1: the godmother is not bony but it is a hurl if the stenographer is not a hurl. sent2: the signora is a kind of an abstinence. sent3: the fact that the tyramine does not testify Lego and is a acrostic is wrong. sent4: if the signora does not testify Lego the fact that the fact that the tyramine does not testify Lego and is not a acrostic does not hold is not wrong. sent5: if that the tyramine does not testify Lego and it is not a acrostic is not right the butternut is not a footfault. sent6: the stenographer does not hurl if the signora testifies Lego and is an abstinence. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it does not rate and it is a hurl does not hold then the signora is not a hurl. sent8: that the stenographer is not a rate and hurls is incorrect if the godmother is bony. sent9: the optimist is not a kind of a monosemy. sent10: if the godmother is non-bony a hurl the optimist is not a kind of a rate. sent11: the optimist does rate if it is not a kind of a monosemy. sent12: something is a footfault if it testifies Lego.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the signora does testify Lego.; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: the signora does testify Lego and is an abstinence.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the stenographer is not a hurl.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the godmother is a kind of non-bony thing that is a hurl is not wrong.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the optimist does not rate.; sent11 & sent9 -> int5: that the optimist is a rate is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the signora does not testify Lego.; int7 & sent4 -> int8: the fact that the tyramine does not testify Lego and it is not a kind of a acrostic does not hold.; int8 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the butternut is a footfault.
sent12 -> int9: if the butternut does testify Lego then it is a footfault.;
$hypothesis$ = the butternut is a footfault. ; $context$ = sent1: the godmother is not bony but it is a hurl if the stenographer is not a hurl. sent2: the signora is a kind of an abstinence. sent3: the fact that the tyramine does not testify Lego and is a acrostic is wrong. sent4: if the signora does not testify Lego the fact that the fact that the tyramine does not testify Lego and is not a acrostic does not hold is not wrong. sent5: if that the tyramine does not testify Lego and it is not a acrostic is not right the butternut is not a footfault. sent6: the stenographer does not hurl if the signora testifies Lego and is an abstinence. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it does not rate and it is a hurl does not hold then the signora is not a hurl. sent8: that the stenographer is not a rate and hurls is incorrect if the godmother is bony. sent9: the optimist is not a kind of a monosemy. sent10: if the godmother is non-bony a hurl the optimist is not a kind of a rate. sent11: the optimist does rate if it is not a kind of a monosemy. sent12: something is a footfault if it testifies Lego. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the signora does testify Lego.; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: the signora does testify Lego and is an abstinence.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the stenographer is not a hurl.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the godmother is a kind of non-bony thing that is a hurl is not wrong.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the optimist does not rate.; sent11 & sent9 -> int5: that the optimist is a rate is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the signora does not testify Lego.; int7 & sent4 -> int8: the fact that the tyramine does not testify Lego and it is not a kind of a acrostic does not hold.; int8 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__