that there exists something such that it is not an irritant is not true.
sent1: that something does not reunify monosemy and does not dilute does not hold if it is not photosynthetic. sent2: the illustrator is photosynthetic if it is a breakdown. sent3: the alga is nonphotosynthetic if something is not a kind of a breakdown and prolongs. sent4: something is not a breakdown but it does prolong. sent5: if the Sennenhunde is a contradistinction then the amorist dilutes. sent6: the illustrator is a breakdown. sent7: the alga does not dilute. sent8: the Sennenhunde is a contradistinction if it is an irritant. sent9: if the amorist dilutes the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilutes. sent10: if something dilutes and does not reunify monosemy it is a contradistinction.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Sennenhunde is an irritant.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the Sennenhunde is a kind of a contradistinction.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the amorist does dilute.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilute.; sent1 -> int4: the fact that the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilute is wrong if it is not photosynthetic.; sent4 & sent3 -> int5: the alga is nonphotosynthetic.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilute is not true.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the Sennenhunde is not an irritant.; int8 -> hypothesis;
the illustrator does not prolong.
sent10 -> int9: the illustrator is a contradistinction if it does dilute and does not reunify monosemy.; sent2 & sent6 -> int10: the illustrator is photosynthetic.;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that it is not an irritant is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not reunify monosemy and does not dilute does not hold if it is not photosynthetic. sent2: the illustrator is photosynthetic if it is a breakdown. sent3: the alga is nonphotosynthetic if something is not a kind of a breakdown and prolongs. sent4: something is not a breakdown but it does prolong. sent5: if the Sennenhunde is a contradistinction then the amorist dilutes. sent6: the illustrator is a breakdown. sent7: the alga does not dilute. sent8: the Sennenhunde is a contradistinction if it is an irritant. sent9: if the amorist dilutes the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilutes. sent10: if something dilutes and does not reunify monosemy it is a contradistinction. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Sennenhunde is an irritant.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the Sennenhunde is a kind of a contradistinction.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the amorist does dilute.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilute.; sent1 -> int4: the fact that the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilute is wrong if it is not photosynthetic.; sent4 & sent3 -> int5: the alga is nonphotosynthetic.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the alga does not reunify monosemy and it does not dilute is not true.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the Sennenhunde is not an irritant.; int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__