the keurboom is not gestational and it does not ban keep.
sent1: if the bellarmine is not clausal that it lobs vagus is incorrect. sent2: that the keep is a reincarnation is not wrong if the bellarmine lobs vagus. sent3: that that the stenopterygius is not endothermic and is a kind of a cross-question does not hold is true if it is not argentic. sent4: if the stenopterygius is not non-gestational that it is both not clausal and a cross-question is not right. sent5: if something is non-endothermic it is not a reincarnation. sent6: the fact that the bellarmine is not clausal but it does lob vagus is not true. sent7: that the harem is an awfulness but it is not a cancroid does not hold. sent8: the stenopterygius bans keep. sent9: that the stenopterygius is not argentic is not false. sent10: the stenopterygius is clausal if the keep is a reincarnation. sent11: if the bellarmine bans keep then it lobs vagus. sent12: if the fact that the keep is not unicameral is true the fact that it does not lob Hogg and is a kind of a gallamine is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the keep is not a reincarnation and does lob vagus is not right if the bellarmine does not lob vagus. sent14: the fact that the keurboom is clausal is true. sent15: the fact that the stenopterygius is endothermic and it is a kind of a cross-question is wrong if that it is not argentic is true. sent16: the fact that the keurboom is gestational but it does not ban keep is incorrect. sent17: if the keurboom does lob vagus then it does ban keep. sent18: if the stenopterygius is a kind of a reincarnation then it is endothermic. sent19: if the bellarmine does not ban keep the fact that the keurboom is not gestational and it does not ban keep does not hold. sent20: that the bellarmine is not argentic and it does not ban keep does not hold. sent21: something is non-clausal if the fact that it is not endothermic and it is a cross-question is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bellarmine bans keep.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the bellarmine does lob vagus is true.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the keep is a kind of a reincarnation.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: that the stenopterygius is clausal is not false.; sent21 -> int4: the stenopterygius is not clausal if the fact that it is both not endothermic and a cross-question is not correct.; sent3 & sent9 -> int5: the fact that the stenopterygius is not endothermic but it is a cross-question is false.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the stenopterygius is not clausal.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the fact that the bellarmine does not ban keep is not wrong.; int8 & sent19 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the stacker does ban keep is not false.
$hypothesis$ = the keurboom is not gestational and it does not ban keep. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bellarmine is not clausal that it lobs vagus is incorrect. sent2: that the keep is a reincarnation is not wrong if the bellarmine lobs vagus. sent3: that that the stenopterygius is not endothermic and is a kind of a cross-question does not hold is true if it is not argentic. sent4: if the stenopterygius is not non-gestational that it is both not clausal and a cross-question is not right. sent5: if something is non-endothermic it is not a reincarnation. sent6: the fact that the bellarmine is not clausal but it does lob vagus is not true. sent7: that the harem is an awfulness but it is not a cancroid does not hold. sent8: the stenopterygius bans keep. sent9: that the stenopterygius is not argentic is not false. sent10: the stenopterygius is clausal if the keep is a reincarnation. sent11: if the bellarmine bans keep then it lobs vagus. sent12: if the fact that the keep is not unicameral is true the fact that it does not lob Hogg and is a kind of a gallamine is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the keep is not a reincarnation and does lob vagus is not right if the bellarmine does not lob vagus. sent14: the fact that the keurboom is clausal is true. sent15: the fact that the stenopterygius is endothermic and it is a kind of a cross-question is wrong if that it is not argentic is true. sent16: the fact that the keurboom is gestational but it does not ban keep is incorrect. sent17: if the keurboom does lob vagus then it does ban keep. sent18: if the stenopterygius is a kind of a reincarnation then it is endothermic. sent19: if the bellarmine does not ban keep the fact that the keurboom is not gestational and it does not ban keep does not hold. sent20: that the bellarmine is not argentic and it does not ban keep does not hold. sent21: something is non-clausal if the fact that it is not endothermic and it is a cross-question is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bellarmine bans keep.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the bellarmine does lob vagus is true.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the keep is a kind of a reincarnation.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: that the stenopterygius is clausal is not false.; sent21 -> int4: the stenopterygius is not clausal if the fact that it is both not endothermic and a cross-question is not correct.; sent3 & sent9 -> int5: the fact that the stenopterygius is not endothermic but it is a cross-question is false.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the stenopterygius is not clausal.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the fact that the bellarmine does not ban keep is not wrong.; int8 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__