the fact that the arsenopyrite is a kind of a odynophagia and is not wingless is not right.
sent1: the fact that the lusterware does not flabbergast mountainside if the lusterware is not a kind of a sorption hold. sent2: that the arsenopyrite is a kind of a odynophagia but it is not wingless is wrong if the lusterware is not a sorption. sent3: the salpinx is not cachectic if there exists something such that the fact that it is a ununtrium is not wrong. sent4: there exists something such that that it is a schooner and it is not a pet is not true. sent5: the arsenopyrite is a kind of a odynophagia. sent6: the lusterware is not a motivation. sent7: the catacomb is not a motivation. sent8: the lusterware does admit. sent9: if the fact that something does not flabbergast mountainside is not false it is not a sorption. sent10: if the lusterware admits then it is a sorption. sent11: that the warship is a pet hold if there exists something such that the fact that it is a schooner and does not pet is not correct. sent12: the catacomb is a sorption if it does flabbergast Crangonidae. sent13: if the catacomb is not a motivation and is a microscopy the arsenopyrite is not an ionosphere. sent14: something that is not an ionosphere is a odynophagia and is not wingless. sent15: a non-wingless thing does not discard. sent16: that the catacomb is a kind of a motivation that is a microscopy is not right. sent17: something does not flabbergast mountainside if it is a kind of a motivation. sent18: the warship admits if it does pet. sent19: there exists something such that it is a ununtrium. sent20: a non-cachectic thing does collect nursing and is an ionosphere. sent21: if the lusterware is a sorption then the catacomb is a sorption. sent22: the salpinx flabbergasts mountainside if something admits and/or does flabbergasts mountainside. sent23: the lusterware is a demography but not a planet if it is not a kind of an illegality. sent24: something does not flabbergast mountainside if the fact that it is not a motivation and it is a microscopy does not hold.
sent24 -> int1: if that the catacomb is not a motivation and is a microscopy does not hold then it does not flabbergast mountainside.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the catacomb is not a motivation but it is a microscopy is not right.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the catacomb does not flabbergast mountainside.; sent9 -> int3: if the catacomb does not flabbergast mountainside the fact that it is not a sorption hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the catacomb is not a kind of a sorption.; sent10 & sent8 -> int5: the fact that the lusterware is a sorption hold.; sent21 & int5 -> int6: the catacomb is a sorption.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the catacomb is not a motivation but it is a microscopy.; int8 & sent13 -> int9: the fact that the arsenopyrite is not an ionosphere hold.; sent14 -> int10: the arsenopyrite is a odynophagia but it is not wingless if it is not a kind of an ionosphere.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the arsenopyrite is both a odynophagia and not wingless is wrong.
sent20 -> int11: the salpinx collects nursing and is an ionosphere if it is not cachectic.; sent19 & sent3 -> int12: the salpinx is not cachectic.; int11 & int12 -> int13: that the salpinx does collect nursing and is an ionosphere hold.; int13 -> int14: the salpinx is an ionosphere.; sent4 & sent11 -> int15: the warship pets.; sent18 & int15 -> int16: the warship does admit.; int16 -> int17: the warship either admits or flabbergasts mountainside or both.; int17 -> int18: something either admits or does flabbergast mountainside or both.; int18 & sent22 -> int19: the salpinx does flabbergast mountainside.; int14 & int19 -> int20: the salpinx is an ionosphere that flabbergasts mountainside.; int20 -> int21: the fact that something is an ionosphere and it does flabbergast mountainside is not wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the arsenopyrite is a kind of a odynophagia and is not wingless is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the lusterware does not flabbergast mountainside if the lusterware is not a kind of a sorption hold. sent2: that the arsenopyrite is a kind of a odynophagia but it is not wingless is wrong if the lusterware is not a sorption. sent3: the salpinx is not cachectic if there exists something such that the fact that it is a ununtrium is not wrong. sent4: there exists something such that that it is a schooner and it is not a pet is not true. sent5: the arsenopyrite is a kind of a odynophagia. sent6: the lusterware is not a motivation. sent7: the catacomb is not a motivation. sent8: the lusterware does admit. sent9: if the fact that something does not flabbergast mountainside is not false it is not a sorption. sent10: if the lusterware admits then it is a sorption. sent11: that the warship is a pet hold if there exists something such that the fact that it is a schooner and does not pet is not correct. sent12: the catacomb is a sorption if it does flabbergast Crangonidae. sent13: if the catacomb is not a motivation and is a microscopy the arsenopyrite is not an ionosphere. sent14: something that is not an ionosphere is a odynophagia and is not wingless. sent15: a non-wingless thing does not discard. sent16: that the catacomb is a kind of a motivation that is a microscopy is not right. sent17: something does not flabbergast mountainside if it is a kind of a motivation. sent18: the warship admits if it does pet. sent19: there exists something such that it is a ununtrium. sent20: a non-cachectic thing does collect nursing and is an ionosphere. sent21: if the lusterware is a sorption then the catacomb is a sorption. sent22: the salpinx flabbergasts mountainside if something admits and/or does flabbergasts mountainside. sent23: the lusterware is a demography but not a planet if it is not a kind of an illegality. sent24: something does not flabbergast mountainside if the fact that it is not a motivation and it is a microscopy does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent24 -> int1: if that the catacomb is not a motivation and is a microscopy does not hold then it does not flabbergast mountainside.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the catacomb is not a motivation but it is a microscopy is not right.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the catacomb does not flabbergast mountainside.; sent9 -> int3: if the catacomb does not flabbergast mountainside the fact that it is not a sorption hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the catacomb is not a kind of a sorption.; sent10 & sent8 -> int5: the fact that the lusterware is a sorption hold.; sent21 & int5 -> int6: the catacomb is a sorption.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the catacomb is not a motivation but it is a microscopy.; int8 & sent13 -> int9: the fact that the arsenopyrite is not an ionosphere hold.; sent14 -> int10: the arsenopyrite is a odynophagia but it is not wingless if it is not a kind of an ionosphere.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__