the methadone is not a kind of a buckwheat.
sent1: something that is a X-ray is unpermissive. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is systematics and is not unsold is not right then the policyholder is not unpermissive. sent3: the fact that the pontifical is systematics thing that is not unsold is not true if it forbids. sent4: the wheatfield is a X-ray if the mine is antheridial. sent5: if the mine is a kind of a dogtrot the wheatfield is a X-ray. sent6: the mine is antheridial and/or a dogtrot. sent7: the fact that something is not a buckwheat hold if it does not forbid. sent8: the methadone is a buckwheat if something that starves forbids. sent9: the policyholder is unpermissive if the wheatfield is unpermissive. sent10: the accountant starves and it does forbid if the pontifical does not forbid.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pontifical does forbid.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the pontifical is systematics but it is not unsold does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is not non-systematics and is not unsold does not hold.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the policyholder is not unpermissive.; sent1 -> int4: if the wheatfield is a X-ray then it is unpermissive.; sent6 & sent4 & sent5 -> int5: the wheatfield is a kind of a X-ray.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the wheatfield is unpermissive hold.; sent9 & int6 -> int7: the policyholder is unpermissive.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the pontifical does not forbid.; int9 & sent10 -> int10: the accountant starves and it forbids.; int10 -> int11: something does starve and does forbid.; int11 & sent8 -> hypothesis;
the methadone is not a buckwheat.
sent7 -> int12: if that the methadone does not forbid hold then it is not a kind of a buckwheat.;
$hypothesis$ = the methadone is not a kind of a buckwheat. ; $context$ = sent1: something that is a X-ray is unpermissive. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is systematics and is not unsold is not right then the policyholder is not unpermissive. sent3: the fact that the pontifical is systematics thing that is not unsold is not true if it forbids. sent4: the wheatfield is a X-ray if the mine is antheridial. sent5: if the mine is a kind of a dogtrot the wheatfield is a X-ray. sent6: the mine is antheridial and/or a dogtrot. sent7: the fact that something is not a buckwheat hold if it does not forbid. sent8: the methadone is a buckwheat if something that starves forbids. sent9: the policyholder is unpermissive if the wheatfield is unpermissive. sent10: the accountant starves and it does forbid if the pontifical does not forbid. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pontifical does forbid.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the pontifical is systematics but it is not unsold does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is not non-systematics and is not unsold does not hold.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the policyholder is not unpermissive.; sent1 -> int4: if the wheatfield is a X-ray then it is unpermissive.; sent6 & sent4 & sent5 -> int5: the wheatfield is a kind of a X-ray.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the wheatfield is unpermissive hold.; sent9 & int6 -> int7: the policyholder is unpermissive.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the pontifical does not forbid.; int9 & sent10 -> int10: the accountant starves and it forbids.; int10 -> int11: something does starve and does forbid.; int11 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__