the fact that if the paleographer is not ovular the scuffer is a tun but not non-pro-life is incorrect.
sent1: if there exists something such that that it does explicate and it is environmental does not hold then the scuffer is not non-pro-life. sent2: the angelim is not impetiginous. sent3: that the scuffer is ovular is right. sent4: if that the moviegoer does not accede and does drape forefoot does not hold then the paleographer is ovular. sent5: that the Dubliner explicates and it is environmental is false if the angelim is not impetiginous. sent6: the paleographer is not a kind of a Zimbabwe. sent7: something does explicate and is environmental. sent8: if the angelim is not pro-life then that the moviegoer is not non-impetiginous and does drape forefoot does not hold. sent9: that the moviegoer does not accede and drapes forefoot does not hold if the scuffer is not a tun.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scuffer is not a tun.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: that the moviegoer does not accede but it does drape forefoot does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the paleographer is ovular.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the paleographer is not ovular.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the scuffer is a kind of a tun.; sent5 & sent2 -> int5: that the Dubliner explicates and it is environmental is false.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it explicates and is environmental does not hold.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the scuffer is pro-life.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the scuffer is a tun and it is pro-life.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the paleographer is not ovular the scuffer is a tun but not non-pro-life is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it does explicate and it is environmental does not hold then the scuffer is not non-pro-life. sent2: the angelim is not impetiginous. sent3: that the scuffer is ovular is right. sent4: if that the moviegoer does not accede and does drape forefoot does not hold then the paleographer is ovular. sent5: that the Dubliner explicates and it is environmental is false if the angelim is not impetiginous. sent6: the paleographer is not a kind of a Zimbabwe. sent7: something does explicate and is environmental. sent8: if the angelim is not pro-life then that the moviegoer is not non-impetiginous and does drape forefoot does not hold. sent9: that the moviegoer does not accede and drapes forefoot does not hold if the scuffer is not a tun. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scuffer is not a tun.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: that the moviegoer does not accede but it does drape forefoot does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the paleographer is ovular.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the paleographer is not ovular.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the scuffer is a kind of a tun.; sent5 & sent2 -> int5: that the Dubliner explicates and it is environmental is false.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it explicates and is environmental does not hold.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the scuffer is pro-life.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the scuffer is a tun and it is pro-life.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__