the brigantine is a bogy.
sent1: the vespid is not neckless. sent2: the vespid does not barrel if the fact that it is not neckless and is a call is false. sent3: the overreaction does blue Apodidae if the schoolfriend blue Apodidae. sent4: that the dribbler is both not young and affine does not hold if the vespid is not a kind of a barreled. sent5: if there exists something such that it does not rail the dogie is not a AHPCRC and/or it does not blue flatcar. sent6: the schoolfriend blues Apodidae and is strategic. sent7: if the fact that something is an affine but it is not a young does not hold it does not barrel. sent8: the vespid is not catechistic. sent9: that the vespid is a kind of neckless a call is not right. sent10: if something that is not neckless is a call then it is not an ignoramus. sent11: the overreaction is not catechistic if that the dribbler is not a young but it is an affine is not correct. sent12: the vespid does barrel but it is not an affine if the dribbler is catechistic. sent13: the vespid is not a kind of an ignoramus if it is a kind of neckless thing that is a kind of a call. sent14: the fact that the dribbler is a young and it is a kind of an affine is not true. sent15: the brigantine is not a bogy if the vespid is not an ignoramus. sent16: the fact that the overreaction is catechistic is not incorrect. sent17: if the vespid is a young the brigantine is a bogy. sent18: the microbrewery is an ironed that is frivolous. sent19: if a barreled is not a kind of an affine it is a young. sent20: the overreaction is not an ignoramus if the dogie is not a kind of a AHPCRC or does not blue flatcar or both. sent21: if something that is a kind of an ironed is frivolous then it does not rail.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the vespid is not neckless but it is a call is not correct.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the vespid is not a barreled.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the dribbler is not a kind of a young but it is an affine is false.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the overreaction is not catechistic.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the vespid is not neckless but it does call is right.; sent10 -> int6: if the vespid is not neckless but it is a call then it is not an ignoramus.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the vespid is not an ignoramus.; int7 & sent15 -> hypothesis;
that the brigantine is a bogy is not incorrect.
sent19 -> int8: the vespid is young if it is a barreled that is not an affine.; sent6 -> int9: that the schoolfriend does blue Apodidae is not false.; sent3 & int9 -> int10: the overreaction does blue Apodidae.; sent21 -> int11: if the microbrewery is an ironed and it is frivolous then it is not a rail.; int11 & sent18 -> int12: the microbrewery is not a kind of a rail.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that it is not a rail.; int13 & sent5 -> int14: the dogie is not a AHPCRC and/or does not blue flatcar.; sent20 & int14 -> int15: the overreaction is not a kind of an ignoramus.; int10 & int15 -> int16: the overreaction blues Apodidae but it is not an ignoramus.; int16 -> int17: something blues Apodidae but it is not an ignoramus.;
$hypothesis$ = the brigantine is a bogy. ; $context$ = sent1: the vespid is not neckless. sent2: the vespid does not barrel if the fact that it is not neckless and is a call is false. sent3: the overreaction does blue Apodidae if the schoolfriend blue Apodidae. sent4: that the dribbler is both not young and affine does not hold if the vespid is not a kind of a barreled. sent5: if there exists something such that it does not rail the dogie is not a AHPCRC and/or it does not blue flatcar. sent6: the schoolfriend blues Apodidae and is strategic. sent7: if the fact that something is an affine but it is not a young does not hold it does not barrel. sent8: the vespid is not catechistic. sent9: that the vespid is a kind of neckless a call is not right. sent10: if something that is not neckless is a call then it is not an ignoramus. sent11: the overreaction is not catechistic if that the dribbler is not a young but it is an affine is not correct. sent12: the vespid does barrel but it is not an affine if the dribbler is catechistic. sent13: the vespid is not a kind of an ignoramus if it is a kind of neckless thing that is a kind of a call. sent14: the fact that the dribbler is a young and it is a kind of an affine is not true. sent15: the brigantine is not a bogy if the vespid is not an ignoramus. sent16: the fact that the overreaction is catechistic is not incorrect. sent17: if the vespid is a young the brigantine is a bogy. sent18: the microbrewery is an ironed that is frivolous. sent19: if a barreled is not a kind of an affine it is a young. sent20: the overreaction is not an ignoramus if the dogie is not a kind of a AHPCRC or does not blue flatcar or both. sent21: if something that is a kind of an ironed is frivolous then it does not rail. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the vespid is not neckless but it is a call is not correct.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the vespid is not a barreled.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the dribbler is not a kind of a young but it is an affine is false.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the overreaction is not catechistic.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the vespid is not neckless but it does call is right.; sent10 -> int6: if the vespid is not neckless but it is a call then it is not an ignoramus.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the vespid is not an ignoramus.; int7 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__