the fact that if the desktop is a kind of a metalworking the borage does formalize countermine does not hold.
sent1: the desktop is a metalworking if something is a Liege but it does not own bed. sent2: the Arikara is erect if something is a Liege but it does not own bed. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Liege that does not own bed does not hold the melamine is not cross-sectional. sent4: the melamine is wrong. sent5: there is something such that that it is a kind of a Liege and does own bed is not right. sent6: the desktop is not a kind of a metalworking if something that is a kind of a Liege does not own bed. sent7: the gyrfalcon does own gyrfalcon and is not cross-sectional. sent8: the melamine is erect if that it wrongs is not false. sent9: there is something such that that it is cross-sectional and does not formalize countermine is not right. sent10: the Arikara does not own bed. sent11: something does not own bed. sent12: that the borage is a storm that is not a kind of a volumeter is not right. sent13: the borage is a Liege if the Arikara does own bed and does not formalize countermine. sent14: the Arikara is cross-sectional if something is a Liege but it does not wrong. sent15: if the melamine is erect but it is not cross-sectional then the borage formalizes countermine. sent16: the melamine is not cross-sectional if there is something such that it owns bed. sent17: the fact that the melamine is erect and does not formalize countermine is incorrect. sent18: if something owns bed and it is erect then the Arikara is not a kind of a metalworking. sent19: the desktop is not erect. sent20: that the melamine does formalize countermine and is not erect is wrong. sent21: that the fact that the Arikara is a Liege and it does own bed is not true hold. sent22: if something is a kind of a metalworking that does not formalize countermine then the Arikara is not a kind of a Liege. sent23: the borage is erect. sent24: the desktop is not a metalworking if something that is a kind of a Liege owns bed. sent25: if the pallium is not a metalworking and not cross-sectional then it is not erect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Arikara is a kind of a Liege that does not own bed.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Liege and does not own bed.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the desktop is not a metalworking.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the desktop is a kind of a metalworking.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the Arikara is a Liege and does not own bed is incorrect.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that that it is a Liege and it does not own bed is incorrect.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the melamine is not cross-sectional.; sent8 & sent4 -> int7: that the melamine is erect is not wrong.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the melamine is erect but it is not cross-sectional.; int8 & sent15 -> int9: the borage does formalize countermine.; [assump2] & int9 -> hypothesis;
the pallium is unerect.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the desktop is a kind of a metalworking the borage does formalize countermine does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the desktop is a metalworking if something is a Liege but it does not own bed. sent2: the Arikara is erect if something is a Liege but it does not own bed. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Liege that does not own bed does not hold the melamine is not cross-sectional. sent4: the melamine is wrong. sent5: there is something such that that it is a kind of a Liege and does own bed is not right. sent6: the desktop is not a kind of a metalworking if something that is a kind of a Liege does not own bed. sent7: the gyrfalcon does own gyrfalcon and is not cross-sectional. sent8: the melamine is erect if that it wrongs is not false. sent9: there is something such that that it is cross-sectional and does not formalize countermine is not right. sent10: the Arikara does not own bed. sent11: something does not own bed. sent12: that the borage is a storm that is not a kind of a volumeter is not right. sent13: the borage is a Liege if the Arikara does own bed and does not formalize countermine. sent14: the Arikara is cross-sectional if something is a Liege but it does not wrong. sent15: if the melamine is erect but it is not cross-sectional then the borage formalizes countermine. sent16: the melamine is not cross-sectional if there is something such that it owns bed. sent17: the fact that the melamine is erect and does not formalize countermine is incorrect. sent18: if something owns bed and it is erect then the Arikara is not a kind of a metalworking. sent19: the desktop is not erect. sent20: that the melamine does formalize countermine and is not erect is wrong. sent21: that the fact that the Arikara is a Liege and it does own bed is not true hold. sent22: if something is a kind of a metalworking that does not formalize countermine then the Arikara is not a kind of a Liege. sent23: the borage is erect. sent24: the desktop is not a metalworking if something that is a kind of a Liege owns bed. sent25: if the pallium is not a metalworking and not cross-sectional then it is not erect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Arikara is a kind of a Liege that does not own bed.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Liege and does not own bed.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the desktop is not a metalworking.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the desktop is a kind of a metalworking.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the Arikara is a Liege and does not own bed is incorrect.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that that it is a Liege and it does not own bed is incorrect.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the melamine is not cross-sectional.; sent8 & sent4 -> int7: that the melamine is erect is not wrong.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the melamine is erect but it is not cross-sectional.; int8 & sent15 -> int9: the borage does formalize countermine.; [assump2] & int9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__