the boomerang does not retouch invalidism.
sent1: if a anuretic thing is a limestone then the stratus does premise deoxycytidine. sent2: everything is not a limestone. sent3: if the boomerang is a kind of a pass then it does not retouch invalidism. sent4: if something is a smallmouth then it is normotensive. sent5: something is a pass and it does retouch invalidism if it is not a smallmouth. sent6: the boomerang retouches invalidism if there exists something such that it is both normotensive and a pass. sent7: the fact that the mailsorter is not a kind of a doweling and it is not a limestone is incorrect if the fact that it does not pass is not incorrect. sent8: there exists something such that it is not non-normotensive. sent9: everything is not a kind of a doweling and is not a limestone. sent10: the mailsorter is not a limestone. sent11: the monoblast is not a Gloucestershire. sent12: if the monoblast is not a Gloucestershire then the mailsorter is a smallmouth and it is later. sent13: there exists something such that it passes.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mailsorter is not a pass.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: that the mailsorter is not a doweling and it is not a limestone is wrong.; sent9 -> int2: the mailsorter is not a doweling and is not a limestone.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the mailsorter is not a pass is not right.; sent4 -> int5: the mailsorter is normotensive if it is a smallmouth.; sent12 & sent11 -> int6: the mailsorter is a smallmouth and it is later.; int6 -> int7: the fact that the mailsorter is a smallmouth is not false.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the mailsorter is normotensive.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the mailsorter is normotensive and it is a pass.; int9 -> int10: something is normotensive and it is a kind of a pass.; int10 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the boomerang does not retouch invalidism.
$hypothesis$ = the boomerang does not retouch invalidism. ; $context$ = sent1: if a anuretic thing is a limestone then the stratus does premise deoxycytidine. sent2: everything is not a limestone. sent3: if the boomerang is a kind of a pass then it does not retouch invalidism. sent4: if something is a smallmouth then it is normotensive. sent5: something is a pass and it does retouch invalidism if it is not a smallmouth. sent6: the boomerang retouches invalidism if there exists something such that it is both normotensive and a pass. sent7: the fact that the mailsorter is not a kind of a doweling and it is not a limestone is incorrect if the fact that it does not pass is not incorrect. sent8: there exists something such that it is not non-normotensive. sent9: everything is not a kind of a doweling and is not a limestone. sent10: the mailsorter is not a limestone. sent11: the monoblast is not a Gloucestershire. sent12: if the monoblast is not a Gloucestershire then the mailsorter is a smallmouth and it is later. sent13: there exists something such that it passes. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mailsorter is not a pass.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: that the mailsorter is not a doweling and it is not a limestone is wrong.; sent9 -> int2: the mailsorter is not a doweling and is not a limestone.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the mailsorter is not a pass is not right.; sent4 -> int5: the mailsorter is normotensive if it is a smallmouth.; sent12 & sent11 -> int6: the mailsorter is a smallmouth and it is later.; int6 -> int7: the fact that the mailsorter is a smallmouth is not false.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the mailsorter is normotensive.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the mailsorter is normotensive and it is a pass.; int9 -> int10: something is normotensive and it is a kind of a pass.; int10 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__