the Tahitian is non-sinistral thing that is not a infructescence.
sent1: the Tahitian is a alexic if the castaway is a kind of a alexic and it is sinistral. sent2: the jewels-of-opar is not a firebrick. sent3: if the jewels-of-opar is lexicostatistics it does not dilapidate. sent4: if the jewels-of-opar is not sinistral then the Tahitian is not sinistral. sent5: the castaway disembowels Hebbel and it is a BPH. sent6: the jewels-of-opar does appoint if the castaway does not appoint and is a kind of a firebrick. sent7: the fact that something is non-sinistral thing that is not a infructescence is wrong if it does not disembowel Hebbel. sent8: if something is lexicostatistics it does not appoint and is a firebrick. sent9: if that the Tahitian is not a alexic and it is not insane is wrong it does yield lysogenization. sent10: that something disembowels Hebbel and does yield lysogenization does not hold if it does not appoint. sent11: if the jewels-of-opar is a kind of a BPH it does not appoint and it does disembowel Hebbel. sent12: the fact that the castaway is a kind of a firebrick but it is not indefinite is wrong. sent13: the fact that that the Tahitian is not a alexic and it is not insane does not hold is not incorrect. sent14: the fact that the castaway is a kind of non-lexicostatistics thing that appoints does not hold if it is not a kind of a infructescence. sent15: the Tahitian is insane if the fact that it does not appoint and is not a kind of a infructescence is false. sent16: the jewels-of-opar is a kind of ungregarious thing that does disembowel Hebbel. sent17: the jewels-of-opar is a kind of non-sinistral thing that does appoint if it yields lysogenization. sent18: the fact that the Tahitian is not lexicostatistics and it is not a bohemianism is not correct. sent19: the Tahitian is rh-negative. sent20: the castaway is lexicostatistics thing that is a BPH. sent21: if the Tahitian is not a firebrick then the fact that it is non-alexic thing that disembowels Hebbel does not hold. sent22: the fact that if the castaway does not disembowel Hebbel the fact that the castaway does appoint and is not sinistral does not hold hold. sent23: if the Tahitian does yield lysogenization and does disembowel Hebbel then the jewels-of-opar does not appoint. sent24: the fact that the cragsman does not Frenchify but it is insane is not right.
sent9 & sent13 -> int1: the Tahitian does yield lysogenization.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Tahitian does disembowel Hebbel.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the Tahitian does yield lysogenization and it disembowels Hebbel.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the jewels-of-opar does not appoint.; sent8 -> int4: the castaway does not appoint and is a firebrick if it is not non-lexicostatistics.; sent20 -> int5: the castaway is lexicostatistics.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the castaway does not appoint but it is a firebrick.; sent6 & int6 -> int7: that the jewels-of-opar does appoint is not incorrect.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the Tahitian does not disembowel Hebbel.; sent7 -> int10: the fact that the Tahitian is not sinistral and not a infructescence is wrong if it does not disembowel Hebbel.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the Tahitian is not sinistral and not a infructescence.
$hypothesis$ = the Tahitian is non-sinistral thing that is not a infructescence. ; $context$ = sent1: the Tahitian is a alexic if the castaway is a kind of a alexic and it is sinistral. sent2: the jewels-of-opar is not a firebrick. sent3: if the jewels-of-opar is lexicostatistics it does not dilapidate. sent4: if the jewels-of-opar is not sinistral then the Tahitian is not sinistral. sent5: the castaway disembowels Hebbel and it is a BPH. sent6: the jewels-of-opar does appoint if the castaway does not appoint and is a kind of a firebrick. sent7: the fact that something is non-sinistral thing that is not a infructescence is wrong if it does not disembowel Hebbel. sent8: if something is lexicostatistics it does not appoint and is a firebrick. sent9: if that the Tahitian is not a alexic and it is not insane is wrong it does yield lysogenization. sent10: that something disembowels Hebbel and does yield lysogenization does not hold if it does not appoint. sent11: if the jewels-of-opar is a kind of a BPH it does not appoint and it does disembowel Hebbel. sent12: the fact that the castaway is a kind of a firebrick but it is not indefinite is wrong. sent13: the fact that that the Tahitian is not a alexic and it is not insane does not hold is not incorrect. sent14: the fact that the castaway is a kind of non-lexicostatistics thing that appoints does not hold if it is not a kind of a infructescence. sent15: the Tahitian is insane if the fact that it does not appoint and is not a kind of a infructescence is false. sent16: the jewels-of-opar is a kind of ungregarious thing that does disembowel Hebbel. sent17: the jewels-of-opar is a kind of non-sinistral thing that does appoint if it yields lysogenization. sent18: the fact that the Tahitian is not lexicostatistics and it is not a bohemianism is not correct. sent19: the Tahitian is rh-negative. sent20: the castaway is lexicostatistics thing that is a BPH. sent21: if the Tahitian is not a firebrick then the fact that it is non-alexic thing that disembowels Hebbel does not hold. sent22: the fact that if the castaway does not disembowel Hebbel the fact that the castaway does appoint and is not sinistral does not hold hold. sent23: if the Tahitian does yield lysogenization and does disembowel Hebbel then the jewels-of-opar does not appoint. sent24: the fact that the cragsman does not Frenchify but it is insane is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent13 -> int1: the Tahitian does yield lysogenization.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Tahitian does disembowel Hebbel.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the Tahitian does yield lysogenization and it disembowels Hebbel.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the jewels-of-opar does not appoint.; sent8 -> int4: the castaway does not appoint and is a firebrick if it is not non-lexicostatistics.; sent20 -> int5: the castaway is lexicostatistics.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the castaway does not appoint but it is a firebrick.; sent6 & int6 -> int7: that the jewels-of-opar does appoint is not incorrect.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the Tahitian does not disembowel Hebbel.; sent7 -> int10: the fact that the Tahitian is not sinistral and not a infructescence is wrong if it does not disembowel Hebbel.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__