that if the limestone does not luminesce then the Cajun is not a Jamison is incorrect.
sent1: the Cajun is not a Jamison if the Mahdist is not a kind of a thrash. sent2: if the limestone does not luminesce and is a gitana then the Mahdist is not a thrash. sent3: that the jibboom does not consociate but it is Malthusian is not incorrect. sent4: the limestone is a gitana if the Monsignor is a compensation. sent5: if the jibboom does not consociate then the Monsignor is a compensation.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the limestone does not luminesce.; sent3 -> int1: the jibboom does not consociate.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: that the Monsignor is a kind of a compensation hold.; sent4 & int2 -> int3: the limestone is a kind of a gitana.; assump1 & int3 -> int4: the limestone does not luminesce but it is a kind of a gitana.; sent2 & int4 -> int5: the Mahdist is not a thrash.; sent1 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the Cajun is not a Jamison is not wrong.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the limestone does not luminesce then the Cajun is not a Jamison is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the Cajun is not a Jamison if the Mahdist is not a kind of a thrash. sent2: if the limestone does not luminesce and is a gitana then the Mahdist is not a thrash. sent3: that the jibboom does not consociate but it is Malthusian is not incorrect. sent4: the limestone is a gitana if the Monsignor is a compensation. sent5: if the jibboom does not consociate then the Monsignor is a compensation. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the limestone does not luminesce.; sent3 -> int1: the jibboom does not consociate.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: that the Monsignor is a kind of a compensation hold.; sent4 & int2 -> int3: the limestone is a kind of a gitana.; assump1 & int3 -> int4: the limestone does not luminesce but it is a kind of a gitana.; sent2 & int4 -> int5: the Mahdist is not a thrash.; sent1 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the Cajun is not a Jamison is not wrong.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__