that there is something such that if it is not an astrology it does not emend glop and it is a neckcloth is not correct.
sent1: if the launce is not an astrology it is a neckcloth and it is a drupe. sent2: there exists something such that if it does not emend glop it is both not an astrology and a drupe. sent3: there exists something such that if it is an astrology it does not emend glop and is a neckcloth. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is not an astrology hold then it is a neckcloth. sent5: the launce is a drupe. sent6: the launce is not a theatrical but it is a kind of a hexahedron. sent7: if the launce is not a kapok then the fact that it is an acetone and it does emend glop is not right. sent8: the wirer does jar Hull and is a drupe. sent9: that the crock is an astrology that does emend bed is false if the fact that it is not a kind of a Cursorius is true. sent10: that the launce is a drupe hold if it is not a kind of an astrology. sent11: that the launce does urticate continuum and it is a Cobitidae is incorrect. sent12: that the launce is not a kapok is true. sent13: that if the launce is the astrology the launce is a kind of a neckcloth that is a drupe hold. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of an astrology is right then it does not emend glop. sent15: something does not emend glop if the fact that it is a kind of an acetone that does emend glop is false. sent16: if that the operative teems and it is a kind of an astrology is not true the fact that it is not a kind of an astrology hold. sent17: the parathormone is not a drupe. sent18: if the Coigue does not tire cheep that it is both a neckcloth and haemophilic does not hold. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not an astrology then it emends glop and is a kind of a neckcloth. sent20: if that something is cathodic and is not a kind of an acetone is not correct it is an acetone. sent21: if the launce is a kind of an astrology then it does not emend glop and it is a neckcloth. sent22: the launce is a flamethrower and it is a premises if it is not a lease. sent23: if the launce does not emend glop and is not an astrology then that the poster is not a kind of an astrology is not false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the launce is not an astrology.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the launce is a neckcloth that is a drupe.; int1 -> int2: the launce is a kind of a neckcloth.; sent15 -> int3: the launce does not emend glop if the fact that it is an acetone and it does emend glop is not true.; sent7 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the launce is an acetone and it emends glop is not correct.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the launce does not emend glop.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the launce does not emend glop and is a kind of a neckcloth.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the launce does not emend glop but it is a neckcloth if it is not a kind of an astrology.; int7 -> hypothesis;
the poster is not a kapok but it is a NT.
sent20 -> int8: the launce is a kind of an acetone if the fact that it is cathodic thing that is not an acetone is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not an astrology it does not emend glop and it is a neckcloth is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the launce is not an astrology it is a neckcloth and it is a drupe. sent2: there exists something such that if it does not emend glop it is both not an astrology and a drupe. sent3: there exists something such that if it is an astrology it does not emend glop and is a neckcloth. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is not an astrology hold then it is a neckcloth. sent5: the launce is a drupe. sent6: the launce is not a theatrical but it is a kind of a hexahedron. sent7: if the launce is not a kapok then the fact that it is an acetone and it does emend glop is not right. sent8: the wirer does jar Hull and is a drupe. sent9: that the crock is an astrology that does emend bed is false if the fact that it is not a kind of a Cursorius is true. sent10: that the launce is a drupe hold if it is not a kind of an astrology. sent11: that the launce does urticate continuum and it is a Cobitidae is incorrect. sent12: that the launce is not a kapok is true. sent13: that if the launce is the astrology the launce is a kind of a neckcloth that is a drupe hold. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of an astrology is right then it does not emend glop. sent15: something does not emend glop if the fact that it is a kind of an acetone that does emend glop is false. sent16: if that the operative teems and it is a kind of an astrology is not true the fact that it is not a kind of an astrology hold. sent17: the parathormone is not a drupe. sent18: if the Coigue does not tire cheep that it is both a neckcloth and haemophilic does not hold. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not an astrology then it emends glop and is a kind of a neckcloth. sent20: if that something is cathodic and is not a kind of an acetone is not correct it is an acetone. sent21: if the launce is a kind of an astrology then it does not emend glop and it is a neckcloth. sent22: the launce is a flamethrower and it is a premises if it is not a lease. sent23: if the launce does not emend glop and is not an astrology then that the poster is not a kind of an astrology is not false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the launce is not an astrology.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the launce is a neckcloth that is a drupe.; int1 -> int2: the launce is a kind of a neckcloth.; sent15 -> int3: the launce does not emend glop if the fact that it is an acetone and it does emend glop is not true.; sent7 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the launce is an acetone and it emends glop is not correct.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the launce does not emend glop.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the launce does not emend glop and is a kind of a neckcloth.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the launce does not emend glop but it is a neckcloth if it is not a kind of an astrology.; int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__