the fact that that the photoemission is both not playful and not a zydeco hold does not hold.
sent1: the dasymeter is a crumbliness if the fact that the fact that the codetalker is not a kind of a crumbliness and/or is allogeneic is true is false. sent2: something does jam tolazamide and is not unpaintable if it deadens. sent3: if the dasymeter is a crumbliness then that the turbine is non-playful thing that does embrown conventioneer is not true. sent4: the carpospore is not playful. sent5: something is allogeneic but it does not jam tolazamide. sent6: if a non-allogeneic thing does jam Picasso it does not coal. sent7: if something is allogeneic but it does not jam tolazamide the photoemission is a crumbliness. sent8: if the fact that something is not playful but it embrowns conventioneer is incorrect it is playful. sent9: if the pistoleer does not contribute then the reflex contribute. sent10: the passage does not contribute. sent11: if the fact that something does not deaden and is achromatic does not hold it does deaden. sent12: if the photoemission is not a kind of a arcsine but it is a ahimsa then it does not embrown conventioneer. sent13: the fact that either the amide is a coal or it is not existent or both if there exists something such that it is not a nonsmoker is not wrong. sent14: the photoemission does not embrown conventioneer but it is a Gordimer if it is a facsimile. sent15: if that the cellulite contributes is not wrong then the pistoleer does not contributes. sent16: there exists something such that it does not jam tolazamide. sent17: if something is a crumbliness it embrowns conventioneer. sent18: the cellulite contributes if the passage does not contributes. sent19: if the photoemission is playful it is not a arcsine and it is a ahimsa. sent20: if the utricle is not existent then that that the Photostat does not deaden but it is achromatic is not true hold. sent21: if the Photostat does jam tolazamide then that the codetalker is not a crumbliness and/or it is allogeneic is not right. sent22: the utricle is not existent if either something is a coal or it is not existent or both. sent23: the osprey is not a kind of a nonsmoker if the reflex is not a kind of a mural or it does contribute or both. sent24: the photoemission is not a zydeco.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the photoemission is playful is true.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the photoemission is both not a arcsine and a ahimsa.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the photoemission does not embrown conventioneer.; sent17 -> int3: if the photoemission is a crumbliness then it does embrown conventioneer.; sent5 & sent7 -> int4: the photoemission is a crumbliness.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the photoemission embrowns conventioneer is correct.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the photoemission is not playful.; int7 & sent24 -> hypothesis;
if the photoemission is a kind of non-allogeneic thing that does jam Picasso it is not a coal.
sent6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the photoemission is both not playful and not a zydeco hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the dasymeter is a crumbliness if the fact that the fact that the codetalker is not a kind of a crumbliness and/or is allogeneic is true is false. sent2: something does jam tolazamide and is not unpaintable if it deadens. sent3: if the dasymeter is a crumbliness then that the turbine is non-playful thing that does embrown conventioneer is not true. sent4: the carpospore is not playful. sent5: something is allogeneic but it does not jam tolazamide. sent6: if a non-allogeneic thing does jam Picasso it does not coal. sent7: if something is allogeneic but it does not jam tolazamide the photoemission is a crumbliness. sent8: if the fact that something is not playful but it embrowns conventioneer is incorrect it is playful. sent9: if the pistoleer does not contribute then the reflex contribute. sent10: the passage does not contribute. sent11: if the fact that something does not deaden and is achromatic does not hold it does deaden. sent12: if the photoemission is not a kind of a arcsine but it is a ahimsa then it does not embrown conventioneer. sent13: the fact that either the amide is a coal or it is not existent or both if there exists something such that it is not a nonsmoker is not wrong. sent14: the photoemission does not embrown conventioneer but it is a Gordimer if it is a facsimile. sent15: if that the cellulite contributes is not wrong then the pistoleer does not contributes. sent16: there exists something such that it does not jam tolazamide. sent17: if something is a crumbliness it embrowns conventioneer. sent18: the cellulite contributes if the passage does not contributes. sent19: if the photoemission is playful it is not a arcsine and it is a ahimsa. sent20: if the utricle is not existent then that that the Photostat does not deaden but it is achromatic is not true hold. sent21: if the Photostat does jam tolazamide then that the codetalker is not a crumbliness and/or it is allogeneic is not right. sent22: the utricle is not existent if either something is a coal or it is not existent or both. sent23: the osprey is not a kind of a nonsmoker if the reflex is not a kind of a mural or it does contribute or both. sent24: the photoemission is not a zydeco. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the photoemission is playful is true.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the photoemission is both not a arcsine and a ahimsa.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the photoemission does not embrown conventioneer.; sent17 -> int3: if the photoemission is a crumbliness then it does embrown conventioneer.; sent5 & sent7 -> int4: the photoemission is a crumbliness.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the photoemission embrowns conventioneer is correct.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the photoemission is not playful.; int7 & sent24 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__