the bugle is not gerundial.
sent1: the manual unspells hame if the fact that that that the cheesemonger does unspells hame and/or is not a healthcare is not incorrect is not right is true. sent2: the fact that the manual does unspell hame is not wrong. sent3: if the bugle is not a removed the fact that the manual does not removed and is parhelic is false. sent4: the fact that the cheesemonger is a healthcare and removes is incorrect if the manual is not a kind of a healthcare. sent5: the bugle is gerundial if that it is not a removed and is parhelic is not correct. sent6: if the shrink-wrap is not a sheepwalk it is a removed and it is parhelic. sent7: the manual is mandibular a healthcare. sent8: the bugle does remove if that it does not unspell hame and is a legend is not correct. sent9: if the manual is not a kind of a removed then the fact that the bugle is not a removed but it is parhelic is wrong. sent10: that the cheesemonger is a legend is right. sent11: the bugle does sentimentalize and it is a swelling. sent12: the manual does unspell hame and it is a kind of a legend. sent13: the fact that the cheesemonger is not a healthcare is not false if something that is a kind of a removed is a legend. sent14: the fact that something is a kind of non-three-wheel thing that unspells hame is incorrect if it is a legend. sent15: that the cheesemonger unspells hame and/or it is not a healthcare is incorrect if the shrink-wrap is a kind of a removed. sent16: if the fact that the manual unspells hame is false that the bugle does not unspells hame and is gerundial is false. sent17: the fact that the cheesemonger does not unspell hame is true. sent18: the cheesemonger is a healthcare. sent19: the herpetologist is a kind of a healthcare. sent20: the fact that the bugle is a healthcare is right. sent21: that the wollastonite is a kind of a legend is correct. sent22: the manual is not gerundial.
sent12 -> int1: the manual is a legend.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the manual does remove.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the manual does remove and it is a legend.; int2 -> int3: something removes and it is a legend.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the cheesemonger is not a kind of a healthcare.; int4 & sent18 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the manual does not remove.; int6 & sent9 -> int7: that the bugle is not a kind of a removed but it is parhelic is not true.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the bugle is not gerundial.
$hypothesis$ = the bugle is not gerundial. ; $context$ = sent1: the manual unspells hame if the fact that that that the cheesemonger does unspells hame and/or is not a healthcare is not incorrect is not right is true. sent2: the fact that the manual does unspell hame is not wrong. sent3: if the bugle is not a removed the fact that the manual does not removed and is parhelic is false. sent4: the fact that the cheesemonger is a healthcare and removes is incorrect if the manual is not a kind of a healthcare. sent5: the bugle is gerundial if that it is not a removed and is parhelic is not correct. sent6: if the shrink-wrap is not a sheepwalk it is a removed and it is parhelic. sent7: the manual is mandibular a healthcare. sent8: the bugle does remove if that it does not unspell hame and is a legend is not correct. sent9: if the manual is not a kind of a removed then the fact that the bugle is not a removed but it is parhelic is wrong. sent10: that the cheesemonger is a legend is right. sent11: the bugle does sentimentalize and it is a swelling. sent12: the manual does unspell hame and it is a kind of a legend. sent13: the fact that the cheesemonger is not a healthcare is not false if something that is a kind of a removed is a legend. sent14: the fact that something is a kind of non-three-wheel thing that unspells hame is incorrect if it is a legend. sent15: that the cheesemonger unspells hame and/or it is not a healthcare is incorrect if the shrink-wrap is a kind of a removed. sent16: if the fact that the manual unspells hame is false that the bugle does not unspells hame and is gerundial is false. sent17: the fact that the cheesemonger does not unspell hame is true. sent18: the cheesemonger is a healthcare. sent19: the herpetologist is a kind of a healthcare. sent20: the fact that the bugle is a healthcare is right. sent21: that the wollastonite is a kind of a legend is correct. sent22: the manual is not gerundial. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: the manual is a legend.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the manual does remove.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the manual does remove and it is a legend.; int2 -> int3: something removes and it is a legend.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the cheesemonger is not a kind of a healthcare.; int4 & sent18 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the manual does not remove.; int6 & sent9 -> int7: that the bugle is not a kind of a removed but it is parhelic is not true.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__