the fact that the tetraskelion is an agitprop but it is not iliac if the region is not a Anouilh is not correct.
sent1: the region is a kind of a Anouilh if the conima worsens. sent2: if something does not astrogate it is a kind of a grogram that is not a cereal. sent3: if something is not a pleurothallis it does not astrogate. sent4: if the region is not iliac that the tetraskelion is not a Anouilh is right. sent5: the conima does worsen but it is not an agitprop if the tetraskelion is not iliac. sent6: that the tetraskelion is an agitprop and is iliac is not true. sent7: the tetraskelion is not a bismark. sent8: the conima worsens if there exists something such that that it is an agitprop and is not iliac is not correct. sent9: if a grogram is not a cereal then it is Montserratian. sent10: the tetraskelion worsens but it is not a kind of an agitprop. sent11: the phycoerythrin is not an agitprop. sent12: something is not a mixture. sent13: if the conima is a Montserratian that it does not worsen and is not a Anouilh is not right. sent14: if that the region is Montserratian is true the conima is a Montserratian. sent15: the conima is not a kind of an agitprop.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that that the tetraskelion is a kind of an agitprop but it is not iliac does not hold.; assump2 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is an agitprop but not iliac is not true.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the conima worsens.; sent1 & int2 -> int3: the region is a Anouilh.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the region is not a Anouilh.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the tetraskelion is an agitprop and not iliac.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
that the blastema is not a kind of an agitprop is correct.
sent9 -> int6: the region is a Montserratian if it is a grogram and not cereal.; sent2 -> int7: the region is a grogram and is not a kind of a cereal if it does not astrogate.; sent3 -> int8: the region does not astrogate if it is not a pleurothallis.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the tetraskelion is an agitprop but it is not iliac if the region is not a Anouilh is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the region is a kind of a Anouilh if the conima worsens. sent2: if something does not astrogate it is a kind of a grogram that is not a cereal. sent3: if something is not a pleurothallis it does not astrogate. sent4: if the region is not iliac that the tetraskelion is not a Anouilh is right. sent5: the conima does worsen but it is not an agitprop if the tetraskelion is not iliac. sent6: that the tetraskelion is an agitprop and is iliac is not true. sent7: the tetraskelion is not a bismark. sent8: the conima worsens if there exists something such that that it is an agitprop and is not iliac is not correct. sent9: if a grogram is not a cereal then it is Montserratian. sent10: the tetraskelion worsens but it is not a kind of an agitprop. sent11: the phycoerythrin is not an agitprop. sent12: something is not a mixture. sent13: if the conima is a Montserratian that it does not worsen and is not a Anouilh is not right. sent14: if that the region is Montserratian is true the conima is a Montserratian. sent15: the conima is not a kind of an agitprop. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that that the tetraskelion is a kind of an agitprop but it is not iliac does not hold.; assump2 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is an agitprop but not iliac is not true.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the conima worsens.; sent1 & int2 -> int3: the region is a Anouilh.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the region is not a Anouilh.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the tetraskelion is an agitprop and not iliac.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__