that the filovirus is not a kind of a tarsal and is Wordsworthian is incorrect.
sent1: that if that something is thermodynamic but it is not a kind of a tinter does not hold then it is not a drum is correct. sent2: that the interlock is not a drum is true if it does impede mist and malingers. sent3: something does not refine soundness if it is thermodynamic and it is not a tinter. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it does not refine soundness and is a drum is incorrect then that the filovirus does meditate is not false. sent5: if the filovirus does not refine soundness then it is a kind of non-tarsal thing that is Wordsworthian. sent6: the interlock does impede mist and it does malinger. sent7: if the filovirus is not a kind of a drum the interlock is a drum that meditates.
sent1 -> int1: if that the filovirus is thermodynamic thing that is not a tinter is not true that it is not a kind of a drum is right.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the filovirus is thermodynamic but it is not a tinter is not true.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the filovirus does not drum.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the interlock is a drum and it meditates.; int3 -> int4: the interlock does drum.; sent2 & sent6 -> int5: the interlock is not a kind of a drum.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the filovirus is both thermodynamic and not a tinter.; sent3 -> int8: the filovirus does not refine soundness if it is both not non-thermodynamic and not a tinter.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the filovirus does not refine soundness.; int9 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
that the filovirus is non-tarsal thing that is Wordsworthian does not hold.
$hypothesis$ = that the filovirus is not a kind of a tarsal and is Wordsworthian is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that if that something is thermodynamic but it is not a kind of a tinter does not hold then it is not a drum is correct. sent2: that the interlock is not a drum is true if it does impede mist and malingers. sent3: something does not refine soundness if it is thermodynamic and it is not a tinter. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it does not refine soundness and is a drum is incorrect then that the filovirus does meditate is not false. sent5: if the filovirus does not refine soundness then it is a kind of non-tarsal thing that is Wordsworthian. sent6: the interlock does impede mist and it does malinger. sent7: if the filovirus is not a kind of a drum the interlock is a drum that meditates. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: if that the filovirus is thermodynamic thing that is not a tinter is not true that it is not a kind of a drum is right.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the filovirus is thermodynamic but it is not a tinter is not true.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the filovirus does not drum.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the interlock is a drum and it meditates.; int3 -> int4: the interlock does drum.; sent2 & sent6 -> int5: the interlock is not a kind of a drum.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the filovirus is both thermodynamic and not a tinter.; sent3 -> int8: the filovirus does not refine soundness if it is both not non-thermodynamic and not a tinter.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the filovirus does not refine soundness.; int9 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__