that there is something such that if the fact that it is Platonic hold it is not a sima but a desire is not true.
sent1: if the endorphin is Platonic it is a desire. sent2: if the fact that something is duodenal is not false then it is a kind of non-editorial a Gempylidae. sent3: if something is heathlike it is not a kind of a Camus and it is postbiblical. sent4: the fact that the endorphin is a sima and it desires is not wrong if it is Platonic. sent5: something is a kind of non-Christological thing that is onside if it is a former. sent6: there exists something such that if it is discreet then it is not conductive. sent7: if something is Platonic then it is a desire. sent8: if the endorphin is a desire it does not command discipleship and it is covert. sent9: there is something such that if it is Platonic it is a kind of a desire. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a vasovasostomy then it is non-sclerotic thing that is a heredity. sent11: if something is Platonic it is a kind of a sima that does desire. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a plectognath the fact that it is not a kind of a tall is not incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it is Platonic then it is a kind of a sima that does desire. sent14: something does not mutate if it is a lee. sent15: a Platonic thing is not a sima but a desire.
sent15 -> int1: if the endorphin is Platonic it is not a kind of a sima and it desires.; int1 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if it is duodenal then it is non-editorial and it is a kind of a Gempylidae.
sent2 -> int2: if the pyrope is duodenal that it is non-editorial thing that is a Gempylidae is true.; int2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it is Platonic hold it is not a sima but a desire is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the endorphin is Platonic it is a desire. sent2: if the fact that something is duodenal is not false then it is a kind of non-editorial a Gempylidae. sent3: if something is heathlike it is not a kind of a Camus and it is postbiblical. sent4: the fact that the endorphin is a sima and it desires is not wrong if it is Platonic. sent5: something is a kind of non-Christological thing that is onside if it is a former. sent6: there exists something such that if it is discreet then it is not conductive. sent7: if something is Platonic then it is a desire. sent8: if the endorphin is a desire it does not command discipleship and it is covert. sent9: there is something such that if it is Platonic it is a kind of a desire. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a vasovasostomy then it is non-sclerotic thing that is a heredity. sent11: if something is Platonic it is a kind of a sima that does desire. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a plectognath the fact that it is not a kind of a tall is not incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it is Platonic then it is a kind of a sima that does desire. sent14: something does not mutate if it is a lee. sent15: a Platonic thing is not a sima but a desire. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 -> int1: if the endorphin is Platonic it is not a kind of a sima and it desires.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__