the fact that the pimp is a congestion and compels bulla is not right.
sent1: if that something does not service Beguine hold the fact that it does not run crop and is a kind of a tryst does not hold. sent2: the pimp is a kind of a congestion if that the Beguine is not a tryst and it does not service Beguine does not hold. sent3: the fact that the refractory is non-directional thing that does not compel bulla is not true if it does not run crop. sent4: if something that is not a kind of a congestion is a tryst the electrophorus is meteoritic. sent5: the fact that something scents tundra and does not service Taoist does not hold if it is meteoritic. sent6: if something is meteoritic then the fact that it is not a gumdrop and it is not critical is not right. sent7: if something is not meteoritic then the fact that it is a congestion and it compels bulla is wrong. sent8: that the Beguine is not a kind of a tryst and does not service Beguine is not true if the electrophorus is not a tryst. sent9: if there exists something such that that it is non-directional thing that does not compel bulla is false the pimp does compel bulla. sent10: the refractory is a kind of a tryst if that the lawman does not run crop but it is a tryst is not correct. sent11: there is something such that the fact that the fact that it runs crop and it does not service annuity hold is not right. sent12: if the electrophorus is not a kind of a tryst and does not service Beguine the pimp is not meteoritic. sent13: the electrophorus is not meteoritic. sent14: the fact that the pimp does not compel bulla but it is meteoritic is false. sent15: if there exists something such that it is meteoritic then that the electrophorus is not meteoritic and is a tryst does not hold. sent16: the refractory does not run crop if there exists something such that the fact that it does run crop and it does not service annuity is not true. sent17: something is meteoritic. sent18: the electrophorus is not a tryst and it does not service Beguine if it does run crop. sent19: either the Beguine is meteoritic or it does not compel bulla or both if the refractory is a kind of a tryst.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the electrophorus is a tryst.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the electrophorus is not meteoritic but it is a tryst is not false.; sent17 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the electrophorus is a kind of non-meteoritic a tryst does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the electrophorus is not a kind of a tryst.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the fact that the Beguine is not a kind of a tryst and does not service Beguine is false.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the pimp is a congestion.; sent11 & sent16 -> int7: the refractory does not run crop.; sent3 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the refractory is a kind of non-directional thing that does not compel bulla is not true.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that the fact that it is not directional and it does not compel bulla is false.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the pimp does compel bulla.; int6 & int10 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that the fact that it does scent tundra and it does not service Taoist is wrong.
sent5 -> int11: that the electrophorus does scent tundra and does not service Taoist is wrong if it is meteoritic.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the pimp is a congestion and compels bulla is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something does not service Beguine hold the fact that it does not run crop and is a kind of a tryst does not hold. sent2: the pimp is a kind of a congestion if that the Beguine is not a tryst and it does not service Beguine does not hold. sent3: the fact that the refractory is non-directional thing that does not compel bulla is not true if it does not run crop. sent4: if something that is not a kind of a congestion is a tryst the electrophorus is meteoritic. sent5: the fact that something scents tundra and does not service Taoist does not hold if it is meteoritic. sent6: if something is meteoritic then the fact that it is not a gumdrop and it is not critical is not right. sent7: if something is not meteoritic then the fact that it is a congestion and it compels bulla is wrong. sent8: that the Beguine is not a kind of a tryst and does not service Beguine is not true if the electrophorus is not a tryst. sent9: if there exists something such that that it is non-directional thing that does not compel bulla is false the pimp does compel bulla. sent10: the refractory is a kind of a tryst if that the lawman does not run crop but it is a tryst is not correct. sent11: there is something such that the fact that the fact that it runs crop and it does not service annuity hold is not right. sent12: if the electrophorus is not a kind of a tryst and does not service Beguine the pimp is not meteoritic. sent13: the electrophorus is not meteoritic. sent14: the fact that the pimp does not compel bulla but it is meteoritic is false. sent15: if there exists something such that it is meteoritic then that the electrophorus is not meteoritic and is a tryst does not hold. sent16: the refractory does not run crop if there exists something such that the fact that it does run crop and it does not service annuity is not true. sent17: something is meteoritic. sent18: the electrophorus is not a tryst and it does not service Beguine if it does run crop. sent19: either the Beguine is meteoritic or it does not compel bulla or both if the refractory is a kind of a tryst. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the electrophorus is a tryst.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the electrophorus is not meteoritic but it is a tryst is not false.; sent17 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the electrophorus is a kind of non-meteoritic a tryst does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the electrophorus is not a kind of a tryst.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the fact that the Beguine is not a kind of a tryst and does not service Beguine is false.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the pimp is a congestion.; sent11 & sent16 -> int7: the refractory does not run crop.; sent3 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the refractory is a kind of non-directional thing that does not compel bulla is not true.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that the fact that it is not directional and it does not compel bulla is false.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the pimp does compel bulla.; int6 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__