the fact that the fact that the cruller is not a Phallus and does not mismanage Mormonism is not right if the conferee does not mismanage Mormonism is not right.
sent1: the conferee is a kind of a Phallus that does suppurate if the cruller is a kind of a Phallus. sent2: if the cruller is not a kind of a Zhuang the fact that it mismanages Mormonism and it is not a Phallus is incorrect. sent3: the cruller does not suppurate. sent4: that the conferee is a Phallus but it does not mismanage Mormonism is not right if the cruller does not mismanage Mormonism. sent5: if the cruller is not a kind of a Phallus then that the conferee does not suppurate and it is not a kind of a Phallus is not correct. sent6: that the fact that the cruller does not suppurate but it is a Phallus is not true is not incorrect if the conferee is not a Phallus. sent7: the fact that the fact that the cruller is not a kind of a Phallus and does not suppurate does not hold hold if the conferee does not suppurate. sent8: the Hope is a Phallus. sent9: the conferee does mismanage Mormonism and suppurates if the cruller does not mismanage Mormonism. sent10: if the cruller is a Phallus then that the conferee does not mismanage Mormonism and it is not a kind of a Phallus does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cruller is not a Phallus and it does not mismanage Mormonism.; assump1 -> int1: the cruller does not mismanage Mormonism.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the conferee mismanages Mormonism and does suppurate.; int2 -> int3: the conferee mismanages Mormonism.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the conferee does not mismanage Mormonism.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the cruller is not a Phallus and it does not mismanage Mormonism does not hold.; [assump2] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the etiologist suppurates and does correct hold.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the cruller is not a Phallus and does not mismanage Mormonism is not right if the conferee does not mismanage Mormonism is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the conferee is a kind of a Phallus that does suppurate if the cruller is a kind of a Phallus. sent2: if the cruller is not a kind of a Zhuang the fact that it mismanages Mormonism and it is not a Phallus is incorrect. sent3: the cruller does not suppurate. sent4: that the conferee is a Phallus but it does not mismanage Mormonism is not right if the cruller does not mismanage Mormonism. sent5: if the cruller is not a kind of a Phallus then that the conferee does not suppurate and it is not a kind of a Phallus is not correct. sent6: that the fact that the cruller does not suppurate but it is a Phallus is not true is not incorrect if the conferee is not a Phallus. sent7: the fact that the fact that the cruller is not a kind of a Phallus and does not suppurate does not hold hold if the conferee does not suppurate. sent8: the Hope is a Phallus. sent9: the conferee does mismanage Mormonism and suppurates if the cruller does not mismanage Mormonism. sent10: if the cruller is a Phallus then that the conferee does not mismanage Mormonism and it is not a kind of a Phallus does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cruller is not a Phallus and it does not mismanage Mormonism.; assump1 -> int1: the cruller does not mismanage Mormonism.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the conferee mismanages Mormonism and does suppurate.; int2 -> int3: the conferee mismanages Mormonism.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the conferee does not mismanage Mormonism.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the cruller is not a Phallus and it does not mismanage Mormonism does not hold.; [assump2] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__