the fact that if that that the bismark is non-prosthetic thing that is a firebrat does not hold is true then the T-square is vicinal is wrong.
sent1: if that the T-square does not chance analgesic but it is a firebrat does not hold the bismark is a nihilism. sent2: if the bismark is Vedic then that the T-square is not Vedic but it is not a nihilism is incorrect. sent3: if that something is Vedic but it is not a kind of a nihilism is incorrect then it chances analgesic. sent4: the T-square is on-line. sent5: something demilitarizes if it is a nihilism. sent6: if that the bismark is a kind of non-prosthetic a firebrat does not hold then it is Vedic. sent7: the T-square is prosthetic. sent8: the T-square is Vedic if it is not a firebrat and chances analgesic. sent9: the fact that the T-square is a kind of a firebrat but it is not a kind of a nihilism is not right. sent10: if that something chances analgesic is right that it is vicinal is right. sent11: the bismark is Vedic if it is prosthetic. sent12: the bismark chances analgesic and is vicinal. sent13: that the bismark is Vedic but it is not a kind of a nihilism is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the bismark is both non-prosthetic and a firebrat is false.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the bismark is not non-Vedic.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: that the T-square is Vedic but it is not a kind of a nihilism does not hold.; sent3 -> int3: the T-square does chance analgesic if that it is Vedic and it is not a nihilism does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the T-square does chance analgesic.; sent10 -> int5: if the T-square chances analgesic it is vicinal.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the T-square is not non-vicinal.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the fact that that the endomorph does not demilitarize and is a crush hold does not hold.
sent5 -> int7: the bismark does demilitarize if it is a nihilism.; sent12 -> int8: the bismark does chance analgesic.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if that that the bismark is non-prosthetic thing that is a firebrat does not hold is true then the T-square is vicinal is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the T-square does not chance analgesic but it is a firebrat does not hold the bismark is a nihilism. sent2: if the bismark is Vedic then that the T-square is not Vedic but it is not a nihilism is incorrect. sent3: if that something is Vedic but it is not a kind of a nihilism is incorrect then it chances analgesic. sent4: the T-square is on-line. sent5: something demilitarizes if it is a nihilism. sent6: if that the bismark is a kind of non-prosthetic a firebrat does not hold then it is Vedic. sent7: the T-square is prosthetic. sent8: the T-square is Vedic if it is not a firebrat and chances analgesic. sent9: the fact that the T-square is a kind of a firebrat but it is not a kind of a nihilism is not right. sent10: if that something chances analgesic is right that it is vicinal is right. sent11: the bismark is Vedic if it is prosthetic. sent12: the bismark chances analgesic and is vicinal. sent13: that the bismark is Vedic but it is not a kind of a nihilism is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the bismark is both non-prosthetic and a firebrat is false.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the bismark is not non-Vedic.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: that the T-square is Vedic but it is not a kind of a nihilism does not hold.; sent3 -> int3: the T-square does chance analgesic if that it is Vedic and it is not a nihilism does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the T-square does chance analgesic.; sent10 -> int5: if the T-square chances analgesic it is vicinal.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the T-square is not non-vicinal.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__