the bluing is a fibrinopeptide and is not barytic.
sent1: if there exists something such that it does catapult countertransference the fact that that the bluing is a kind of a fibrinopeptide but it is not barytic hold is false. sent2: if something does not dung that it is not a Carcharodon and it is barytic is false. sent3: if something that is not deconstructionist does not catapult countertransference then it is diaphyseal. sent4: something is sympathetic if it is diaphyseal. sent5: the bluing is not barytic if it does not dung. sent6: if the lisper is a kind of a hoopoe that does not philander evisceration then it is not a Carcharodon. sent7: if the fact that something is not a Carcharodon but barytic is wrong it is not barytic. sent8: the go is not sympathetic but it does dung if the fact that the lisper is not a kind of a Carcharodon is right. sent9: if the radiocarbon is not diaphyseal and it is not sympathetic the lisper is deconstructionist. sent10: the go is ecclesiastical or not a beach or both. sent11: if there is something such that it is a Carcharodon the fact that the lisper catapults countertransference and is not sympathetic is not true. sent12: the go is not deconstructionist if either it is ecclesiastical or it is not a kind of a beach or both. sent13: something is a fibrinopeptide and is not barytic if it does catapult countertransference. sent14: if something is either not a fibrinopeptide or unsympathetic or both it is not unsympathetic. sent15: the fact that the go does not dung is not incorrect if that the lisper does not philander evisceration and is not a hoopoe is correct. sent16: the fact that the lisper is a hoopoe but it does not philander evisceration is not incorrect. sent17: the bluing is not a fibrinopeptide or it is not sympathetic or both if something is not barytic. sent18: if the macon does not philander evisceration then it is not a hoopoe and it is a Carcharodon. sent19: if something that is not a kind of a hoopoe is a Carcharodon it does not dung. sent20: the fact that the go is deconstructionist if the lisper is deconstructionist is not false.
sent12 & sent10 -> int1: that the go is non-deconstructionist is correct.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the go does not catapult countertransference.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the go is a kind of non-deconstructionist thing that does not catapult countertransference.; sent3 -> int3: the go is diaphyseal if it is a kind of non-deconstructionist thing that does not catapult countertransference.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the go is diaphyseal.; sent4 -> int5: the go is sympathetic if it is diaphyseal.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the go is sympathetic.; sent6 & sent16 -> int7: the lisper is not a Carcharodon.; sent8 & int7 -> int8: the go is a kind of unsympathetic thing that does dung.; int8 -> int9: the go is not sympathetic.; int6 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: the go catapults countertransference.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that it catapults countertransference.; int12 & sent1 -> hypothesis;
the bluing is not a beach.
sent14 -> int13: that the bluing is not sympathetic hold if either it is not a kind of a fibrinopeptide or it is not sympathetic or both.; sent7 -> int14: the go is not barytic if the fact that it is not a Carcharodon and it is barytic does not hold.; sent2 -> int15: that that the go is not a Carcharodon but it is barytic is true is not true if it does not dung.;
$hypothesis$ = the bluing is a fibrinopeptide and is not barytic. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it does catapult countertransference the fact that that the bluing is a kind of a fibrinopeptide but it is not barytic hold is false. sent2: if something does not dung that it is not a Carcharodon and it is barytic is false. sent3: if something that is not deconstructionist does not catapult countertransference then it is diaphyseal. sent4: something is sympathetic if it is diaphyseal. sent5: the bluing is not barytic if it does not dung. sent6: if the lisper is a kind of a hoopoe that does not philander evisceration then it is not a Carcharodon. sent7: if the fact that something is not a Carcharodon but barytic is wrong it is not barytic. sent8: the go is not sympathetic but it does dung if the fact that the lisper is not a kind of a Carcharodon is right. sent9: if the radiocarbon is not diaphyseal and it is not sympathetic the lisper is deconstructionist. sent10: the go is ecclesiastical or not a beach or both. sent11: if there is something such that it is a Carcharodon the fact that the lisper catapults countertransference and is not sympathetic is not true. sent12: the go is not deconstructionist if either it is ecclesiastical or it is not a kind of a beach or both. sent13: something is a fibrinopeptide and is not barytic if it does catapult countertransference. sent14: if something is either not a fibrinopeptide or unsympathetic or both it is not unsympathetic. sent15: the fact that the go does not dung is not incorrect if that the lisper does not philander evisceration and is not a hoopoe is correct. sent16: the fact that the lisper is a hoopoe but it does not philander evisceration is not incorrect. sent17: the bluing is not a fibrinopeptide or it is not sympathetic or both if something is not barytic. sent18: if the macon does not philander evisceration then it is not a hoopoe and it is a Carcharodon. sent19: if something that is not a kind of a hoopoe is a Carcharodon it does not dung. sent20: the fact that the go is deconstructionist if the lisper is deconstructionist is not false. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent10 -> int1: that the go is non-deconstructionist is correct.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the go does not catapult countertransference.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the go is a kind of non-deconstructionist thing that does not catapult countertransference.; sent3 -> int3: the go is diaphyseal if it is a kind of non-deconstructionist thing that does not catapult countertransference.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the go is diaphyseal.; sent4 -> int5: the go is sympathetic if it is diaphyseal.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the go is sympathetic.; sent6 & sent16 -> int7: the lisper is not a Carcharodon.; sent8 & int7 -> int8: the go is a kind of unsympathetic thing that does dung.; int8 -> int9: the go is not sympathetic.; int6 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: the go catapults countertransference.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that it catapults countertransference.; int12 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__