the reef is autoimmune.
sent1: if something is not enthusiastic then the fact that it is non-laryngeal and it is not close is incorrect. sent2: if that the conditioner is non-laryngeal thing that is not close does not hold then the reef is not close. sent3: that the thrift is not laryngeal is true if there are close and non-Cromwellian things. sent4: that the conditioner closes is correct. sent5: the thrift is not non-laryngeal. sent6: the conditioner is non-enthusiastic thing that is not a squawbush if the fact that the thrift is heuristic is not false. sent7: the reef does doctor joker. sent8: there is something such that it is autoimmune. sent9: The joker does doctor reef. sent10: if something that does not doctor joker is Cromwellian then it is autoimmune. sent11: if something that is autoimmune does doctor joker then the conditioner is not Cromwellian.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the reef is autoimmune.; assump1 & sent7 -> int1: the reef is autoimmune and it does doctor joker.; int1 -> int2: something is a kind of autoimmune thing that does doctor joker.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the conditioner is non-Cromwellian.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the conditioner does close and is not Cromwellian.; int4 -> int5: something is a kind of close thing that is not Cromwellian.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the thrift is not laryngeal.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the reef is autoimmune.
sent10 -> int8: if that the reef does not doctor joker but it is Cromwellian is right it is autoimmune.; sent1 -> int9: if the conditioner is not enthusiastic then that it is not laryngeal and not close is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the reef is autoimmune. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not enthusiastic then the fact that it is non-laryngeal and it is not close is incorrect. sent2: if that the conditioner is non-laryngeal thing that is not close does not hold then the reef is not close. sent3: that the thrift is not laryngeal is true if there are close and non-Cromwellian things. sent4: that the conditioner closes is correct. sent5: the thrift is not non-laryngeal. sent6: the conditioner is non-enthusiastic thing that is not a squawbush if the fact that the thrift is heuristic is not false. sent7: the reef does doctor joker. sent8: there is something such that it is autoimmune. sent9: The joker does doctor reef. sent10: if something that does not doctor joker is Cromwellian then it is autoimmune. sent11: if something that is autoimmune does doctor joker then the conditioner is not Cromwellian. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the reef is autoimmune.; assump1 & sent7 -> int1: the reef is autoimmune and it does doctor joker.; int1 -> int2: something is a kind of autoimmune thing that does doctor joker.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the conditioner is non-Cromwellian.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the conditioner does close and is not Cromwellian.; int4 -> int5: something is a kind of close thing that is not Cromwellian.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the thrift is not laryngeal.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__