the fact that if the plaiter does condescend the fact that the botanist is light-duty and does not turn plaiter is false is incorrect.
sent1: there is something such that that it is non-ferial thing that is a milk-vetch does not hold. sent2: if the botanist is not a kind of a Zeus then the fact that it is light-duty and it turns plaiter is not right. sent3: if something is not a Zeus that it is light-duty and it does not turn plaiter does not hold. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is non-hypotonic thing that is a milk-vetch does not hold the Guarnerius is admissible. sent5: if that the botanist turns plaiter is correct the plaiter is a Zeus and not light-duty. sent6: that the plaiter does turn plaiter and does not condescend is incorrect if the botanist is Cyprian. sent7: the fact that the fact that the botanist is the Zeus and it is light-duty is not right if the botanist is not Cyprian is not incorrect. sent8: the plaiter is Cyprian if there exists something such that that the fact that it is both non-ferial and a milk-vetch is not wrong is wrong. sent9: if the plaiter condescends and is Cyprian the botanist is not a Zeus. sent10: if something is not a kind of a Swazi then the plaiter is a kind of a milk-vetch. sent11: the botanist is not a smallmouth.
sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the plaiter is Cyprian.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the plaiter condescends.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the plaiter does condescend and it is Cyprian.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the botanist is not a Zeus.; sent3 -> int4: if the botanist is not a Zeus then the fact that it is light-duty and it does not turn plaiter does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the botanist is light-duty but it does not turn plaiter is false.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the plaiter does condescend the fact that the botanist is light-duty and does not turn plaiter is false is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is non-ferial thing that is a milk-vetch does not hold. sent2: if the botanist is not a kind of a Zeus then the fact that it is light-duty and it turns plaiter is not right. sent3: if something is not a Zeus that it is light-duty and it does not turn plaiter does not hold. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is non-hypotonic thing that is a milk-vetch does not hold the Guarnerius is admissible. sent5: if that the botanist turns plaiter is correct the plaiter is a Zeus and not light-duty. sent6: that the plaiter does turn plaiter and does not condescend is incorrect if the botanist is Cyprian. sent7: the fact that the fact that the botanist is the Zeus and it is light-duty is not right if the botanist is not Cyprian is not incorrect. sent8: the plaiter is Cyprian if there exists something such that that the fact that it is both non-ferial and a milk-vetch is not wrong is wrong. sent9: if the plaiter condescends and is Cyprian the botanist is not a Zeus. sent10: if something is not a kind of a Swazi then the plaiter is a kind of a milk-vetch. sent11: the botanist is not a smallmouth. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the plaiter is Cyprian.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the plaiter condescends.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the plaiter does condescend and it is Cyprian.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the botanist is not a Zeus.; sent3 -> int4: if the botanist is not a Zeus then the fact that it is light-duty and it does not turn plaiter does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the botanist is light-duty but it does not turn plaiter is false.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__