that there exists something such that if it parses cannonball then it does satiate is not true.
sent1: if something is not polar that it is not a kind of a Episcopalianism is not incorrect. sent2: the swathe is an intersection. sent3: if something is ethereal then it satiates. sent4: the fact that the chemist is not an absorbent and it is not ritualistic does not hold. sent5: if the fact that the sublimate is not ethereal is not wrong then the swathe is a transposition and parses cannonball. sent6: if that something is a feculence and/or it does not satiate is incorrect the fact that it is not ethereal is not wrong. sent7: the swathe is ethereal if it does parse cannonball. sent8: the chemist is a kind of an absorbent if that it is not absorbent and is not ritualistic does not hold. sent9: the fact that the sublimate is a feculence or it is not satiate or both is false if that the vicar is not a Episcopalianism is not wrong. sent10: the fact that something is not a mudcat but it is polar is false if it is absorbent.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the swathe parses cannonball.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the swathe is ethereal.; sent3 -> int2: if the swathe is ethereal then it does satiate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the swathe satiates.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the swathe is satiate if it parses cannonball.; int4 -> hypothesis;
the swathe is a transposition.
sent6 -> int5: if the fact that the sublimate is a feculence or is not satiate or both does not hold then it is not ethereal.; sent1 -> int6: the vicar is not a Episcopalianism if it is not polar.; sent10 -> int7: the fact that the chemist is not a mudcat but it is polar does not hold if it is an absorbent.; sent8 & sent4 -> int8: the chemist is an absorbent.; int7 & int8 -> int9: that the chemist is both not a mudcat and polar is wrong.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a mudcat and it is polar is incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it parses cannonball then it does satiate is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not polar that it is not a kind of a Episcopalianism is not incorrect. sent2: the swathe is an intersection. sent3: if something is ethereal then it satiates. sent4: the fact that the chemist is not an absorbent and it is not ritualistic does not hold. sent5: if the fact that the sublimate is not ethereal is not wrong then the swathe is a transposition and parses cannonball. sent6: if that something is a feculence and/or it does not satiate is incorrect the fact that it is not ethereal is not wrong. sent7: the swathe is ethereal if it does parse cannonball. sent8: the chemist is a kind of an absorbent if that it is not absorbent and is not ritualistic does not hold. sent9: the fact that the sublimate is a feculence or it is not satiate or both is false if that the vicar is not a Episcopalianism is not wrong. sent10: the fact that something is not a mudcat but it is polar is false if it is absorbent. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the swathe parses cannonball.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the swathe is ethereal.; sent3 -> int2: if the swathe is ethereal then it does satiate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the swathe satiates.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the swathe is satiate if it parses cannonball.; int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__