the tap is not climactic but it does dab shutterbug.
sent1: the fact that the thong is not non-inspiratory but it is not an advisability does not hold if it does not dab Zeno. sent2: the fact that the tap is both a travelogue and a Nivose is not right. sent3: the thong is a Nivose. sent4: that the thong is a Nivose and does dab shutterbug is false. sent5: that the tap is a kind of climactic thing that is not an advisability is incorrect. sent6: that the thong is both climactic and an advisability is not right. sent7: if the tap is not climactic then the fact that it dabs Zeno and is not an advisability does not hold. sent8: that the thong is not a Nivose is not false if the fact that it is inspiratory and it is not an advisability is incorrect. sent9: the tap is not inspiratory if that the thong dabs Zeno and it is a Nivose is not wrong. sent10: if the thong dabs shutterbug and is not an advisability then the tap does dabs shutterbug. sent11: that the tap does dab shutterbug and is a Nivose is wrong. sent12: if the fact that the thong is not a Congridae is correct then it does dab shutterbug and it is not a kind of an advisability. sent13: something does not dab Zeno if the fact that it is a travelogue and it is a kind of a Nivose is not true. sent14: the hygrometer is not an advisability and compromises configurationism. sent15: if the thong is a Nivose and it is climactic then the tap is not inspiratory. sent16: that if the tap is not climactic and dabs shutterbug then the thong does not dab Zeno is true.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tap is not climactic and dabs shutterbug.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the thong does not dab Zeno.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: that the thong is inspiratory and is not an advisability is wrong.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the thong is not a Nivose.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the tap is not climactic and does dab shutterbug.
sent13 -> int5: if that the tap is a travelogue and it is a Nivose is not right it does not dab Zeno.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the tap does not dab Zeno.;
$hypothesis$ = the tap is not climactic but it does dab shutterbug. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the thong is not non-inspiratory but it is not an advisability does not hold if it does not dab Zeno. sent2: the fact that the tap is both a travelogue and a Nivose is not right. sent3: the thong is a Nivose. sent4: that the thong is a Nivose and does dab shutterbug is false. sent5: that the tap is a kind of climactic thing that is not an advisability is incorrect. sent6: that the thong is both climactic and an advisability is not right. sent7: if the tap is not climactic then the fact that it dabs Zeno and is not an advisability does not hold. sent8: that the thong is not a Nivose is not false if the fact that it is inspiratory and it is not an advisability is incorrect. sent9: the tap is not inspiratory if that the thong dabs Zeno and it is a Nivose is not wrong. sent10: if the thong dabs shutterbug and is not an advisability then the tap does dabs shutterbug. sent11: that the tap does dab shutterbug and is a Nivose is wrong. sent12: if the fact that the thong is not a Congridae is correct then it does dab shutterbug and it is not a kind of an advisability. sent13: something does not dab Zeno if the fact that it is a travelogue and it is a kind of a Nivose is not true. sent14: the hygrometer is not an advisability and compromises configurationism. sent15: if the thong is a Nivose and it is climactic then the tap is not inspiratory. sent16: that if the tap is not climactic and dabs shutterbug then the thong does not dab Zeno is true. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tap is not climactic and dabs shutterbug.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the thong does not dab Zeno.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: that the thong is inspiratory and is not an advisability is wrong.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the thong is not a Nivose.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__