that the paragon is a produce if the convener is a kind of a Simenon is not right.
sent1: if that the convener does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant is not right then it is a Simenon. sent2: if the convener does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant then that the paragon produces is not incorrect. sent3: if the paragon does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant then the convener is a produce. sent4: if the convener studies homonym it is not a Simenon. sent5: that the convener is not a Simenon is right if the fact that that it does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant is not false is not true. sent6: if the convener does study homonym but it does not replicate quadrant the paragon does produce. sent7: the convener is not a produce. sent8: if something is not a tempter it is a positivity and it is a Simenon. sent9: if that the paragon is not a kind of a produce and it does not replicate quadrant is not true then it does not study homonym. sent10: if the blank does metabolize tamarack and is a Keynesian it is not a tempter. sent11: the oxidation-reduction studies homonym. sent12: the fact that the convener studies homonym but it does not replicate quadrant is false. sent13: the convener does not study homonym.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the convener is a Simenon.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the convener does not study homonym and it does not replicate quadrant is not right.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the convener is not a Simenon.; assump2 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the convener does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the paragon is a produce is not false.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the blank is a produce.
sent8 -> int5: the blank is a positivity and it is a Simenon if it is not a tempter.;
$hypothesis$ = that the paragon is a produce if the convener is a kind of a Simenon is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the convener does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant is not right then it is a Simenon. sent2: if the convener does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant then that the paragon produces is not incorrect. sent3: if the paragon does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant then the convener is a produce. sent4: if the convener studies homonym it is not a Simenon. sent5: that the convener is not a Simenon is right if the fact that that it does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant is not false is not true. sent6: if the convener does study homonym but it does not replicate quadrant the paragon does produce. sent7: the convener is not a produce. sent8: if something is not a tempter it is a positivity and it is a Simenon. sent9: if that the paragon is not a kind of a produce and it does not replicate quadrant is not true then it does not study homonym. sent10: if the blank does metabolize tamarack and is a Keynesian it is not a tempter. sent11: the oxidation-reduction studies homonym. sent12: the fact that the convener studies homonym but it does not replicate quadrant is false. sent13: the convener does not study homonym. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the convener is a Simenon.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the convener does not study homonym and it does not replicate quadrant is not right.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the convener is not a Simenon.; assump2 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the convener does not study homonym and does not replicate quadrant.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the paragon is a produce is not false.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__