the sporocarp is not a Kulanapan and is generative.
sent1: the auto-changer is not a kind of a Conyza and it is not unsocial. sent2: something ridicules teff if that it is both not downtown and not preventable is false. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is a mural and it is not littoral is wrong. sent4: if the auto-changer is not downtown and it is not preventable then that it does not contemn arquebus is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the sporocarp is not a Kulanapan but it is generative does not hold if there exists something such that it does ridicule teff. sent6: if there exists something such that that it is a mural and it is not a littoral is wrong then the fact that the stair-rod is not a kind of a mural is not false. sent7: if the stair-rod is not a mural the fact that the fact that the auto-changer is not a Conyza and it does not contemn arquebus is not incorrect is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the auto-changer is both non-downtown and not preventable.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the auto-changer does not contemn arquebus.; sent1 -> int2: the auto-changer is not a Conyza.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the auto-changer is not a Conyza and does not contemn arquebus.; sent3 & sent6 -> int4: the stair-rod is not a mural.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: that the auto-changer is not a Conyza and it does not contemn arquebus is not correct.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the fact that the auto-changer is not downtown and it is not preventable is wrong.; sent2 -> int8: the fact that the auto-changer ridicules teff is right if that the fact that it is both not a downtown and not preventable hold does not hold.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the auto-changer does ridicule teff is right.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it does ridicule teff.; int10 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the sporocarp is not a Kulanapan and is generative. ; $context$ = sent1: the auto-changer is not a kind of a Conyza and it is not unsocial. sent2: something ridicules teff if that it is both not downtown and not preventable is false. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is a mural and it is not littoral is wrong. sent4: if the auto-changer is not downtown and it is not preventable then that it does not contemn arquebus is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the sporocarp is not a Kulanapan but it is generative does not hold if there exists something such that it does ridicule teff. sent6: if there exists something such that that it is a mural and it is not a littoral is wrong then the fact that the stair-rod is not a kind of a mural is not false. sent7: if the stair-rod is not a mural the fact that the fact that the auto-changer is not a Conyza and it does not contemn arquebus is not incorrect is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the auto-changer is both non-downtown and not preventable.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the auto-changer does not contemn arquebus.; sent1 -> int2: the auto-changer is not a Conyza.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the auto-changer is not a Conyza and does not contemn arquebus.; sent3 & sent6 -> int4: the stair-rod is not a mural.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: that the auto-changer is not a Conyza and it does not contemn arquebus is not correct.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the fact that the auto-changer is not downtown and it is not preventable is wrong.; sent2 -> int8: the fact that the auto-changer ridicules teff is right if that the fact that it is both not a downtown and not preventable hold does not hold.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the auto-changer does ridicule teff is right.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it does ridicule teff.; int10 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__