the flint is a kind of an illumination.
sent1: if something is an illumination it is not centralist. sent2: the flint is a young if there exists something such that it is a kind of an illumination that is a clotheshorse. sent3: if there is something such that that it is both a clotheshorse and a abidance does not hold then the liturgist is not young. sent4: the Simoniz is centralist if something that is an illumination is a abidance. sent5: the liturgist is not a kind of a young if there exists something such that it is not a abidance. sent6: the psycholinguist is centralist and it is a young if the liturgist is not a kind of a clotheshorse. sent7: the psycholinguist is centralist. sent8: if the Simoniz is a kind of an illumination it is not a kind of a abidance. sent9: if there exists something such that it is centralist and is a contingency the liturgist is a young. sent10: that the Simoniz is both a clotheshorse and a abidance is false. sent11: the psycholinguist is centralist and is a contingency if the flint is not centralist. sent12: the fact that the Simoniz is not a contingency hold.
sent1 -> int1: if the flint is a kind of an illumination it is not centralist.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the flint is a kind of an illumination.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the flint is not non-centralist is wrong.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the psycholinguist is centralist thing that is a kind of a contingency.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it is a kind of centralist a contingency.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the liturgist is a young.; sent10 -> int6: there exists something such that that it is a clotheshorse and it is a abidance is not true.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the liturgist is not young.; int5 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
the flint is an illumination.
$hypothesis$ = the flint is a kind of an illumination. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is an illumination it is not centralist. sent2: the flint is a young if there exists something such that it is a kind of an illumination that is a clotheshorse. sent3: if there is something such that that it is both a clotheshorse and a abidance does not hold then the liturgist is not young. sent4: the Simoniz is centralist if something that is an illumination is a abidance. sent5: the liturgist is not a kind of a young if there exists something such that it is not a abidance. sent6: the psycholinguist is centralist and it is a young if the liturgist is not a kind of a clotheshorse. sent7: the psycholinguist is centralist. sent8: if the Simoniz is a kind of an illumination it is not a kind of a abidance. sent9: if there exists something such that it is centralist and is a contingency the liturgist is a young. sent10: that the Simoniz is both a clotheshorse and a abidance is false. sent11: the psycholinguist is centralist and is a contingency if the flint is not centralist. sent12: the fact that the Simoniz is not a contingency hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: if the flint is a kind of an illumination it is not centralist.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the flint is a kind of an illumination.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the flint is not non-centralist is wrong.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the psycholinguist is centralist thing that is a kind of a contingency.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it is a kind of centralist a contingency.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the liturgist is a young.; sent10 -> int6: there exists something such that that it is a clotheshorse and it is a abidance is not true.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the liturgist is not young.; int5 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__