the fact that the nobelium is non-false thing that does not clap experimentalism is wrong.
sent1: the fact that the nobelium is not false but it does clap experimentalism is false. sent2: the ultraviolet does not clap miter if the succade is a kind of a Bura and is actinic. sent3: if the succade is non-false then the fact that the ultraviolet does not petrify and claps miter does not hold. sent4: if the ultraviolet is cortical it petrifies. sent5: the nobelium is a kind of a Bura. sent6: the succade is a brachycephalic. sent7: the ultraviolet is a Bura. sent8: the ultraviolet does not clap Ascophyllum. sent9: if the ultraviolet is not brachycephalic the succade claps miter. sent10: That the miter does not clap succade hold. sent11: the succade is actinic. sent12: if the ultraviolet is not actinic the bookbindery is a kind of a Bura. sent13: the ultraviolet is cortical if it is a kind of a brachycephalic. sent14: that the fact that that the nobelium is not false but it is brachycephalic hold is wrong is correct. sent15: the fact that the nobelium is not cortical and it is not false is not right. sent16: the bookbindery is not actinic if the ultraviolet petrifies and it is a Bura. sent17: the nobelium is cortical. sent18: that the succade does not clap miter hold. sent19: if the ultraviolet does clap miter and it is a kind of a brachycephalic the succade is not actinic. sent20: if the ultraviolet does clap miter then it is a Bura. sent21: if the bookbindery is not actinic that the nobelium is non-false thing that does not clap experimentalism does not hold. sent22: the fact that the nobelium does petrify and is not a kind of a Bura is not correct. sent23: that the succade is both non-brachycephalic and not unemotional is not correct. sent24: the fact that the bookbindery is both not a Bura and not actinic is not true.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the ultraviolet is not brachycephalic hold.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the succade claps miter.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the ultraviolet is brachycephalic.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the ultraviolet is cortical.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the ultraviolet petrifies.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the ultraviolet does petrify and it is a kind of a Bura.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: the bookbindery is not actinic.; int7 & sent21 -> hypothesis;
the nobelium is not false and does not clap experimentalism.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the nobelium is non-false thing that does not clap experimentalism is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the nobelium is not false but it does clap experimentalism is false. sent2: the ultraviolet does not clap miter if the succade is a kind of a Bura and is actinic. sent3: if the succade is non-false then the fact that the ultraviolet does not petrify and claps miter does not hold. sent4: if the ultraviolet is cortical it petrifies. sent5: the nobelium is a kind of a Bura. sent6: the succade is a brachycephalic. sent7: the ultraviolet is a Bura. sent8: the ultraviolet does not clap Ascophyllum. sent9: if the ultraviolet is not brachycephalic the succade claps miter. sent10: That the miter does not clap succade hold. sent11: the succade is actinic. sent12: if the ultraviolet is not actinic the bookbindery is a kind of a Bura. sent13: the ultraviolet is cortical if it is a kind of a brachycephalic. sent14: that the fact that that the nobelium is not false but it is brachycephalic hold is wrong is correct. sent15: the fact that the nobelium is not cortical and it is not false is not right. sent16: the bookbindery is not actinic if the ultraviolet petrifies and it is a Bura. sent17: the nobelium is cortical. sent18: that the succade does not clap miter hold. sent19: if the ultraviolet does clap miter and it is a kind of a brachycephalic the succade is not actinic. sent20: if the ultraviolet does clap miter then it is a Bura. sent21: if the bookbindery is not actinic that the nobelium is non-false thing that does not clap experimentalism does not hold. sent22: the fact that the nobelium does petrify and is not a kind of a Bura is not correct. sent23: that the succade is both non-brachycephalic and not unemotional is not correct. sent24: the fact that the bookbindery is both not a Bura and not actinic is not true. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the ultraviolet is not brachycephalic hold.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the succade claps miter.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the ultraviolet is brachycephalic.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the ultraviolet is cortical.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the ultraviolet petrifies.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the ultraviolet does petrify and it is a kind of a Bura.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: the bookbindery is not actinic.; int7 & sent21 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__