that there exists something such that if that it is removable is right then it does eagle is not right.
sent1: something that displaces and is not a kind of a walkingstick is not removable. sent2: if that the pyroelectricity is a sip and is not multilateral is false the fact that it is a kind of a puller hold. sent3: if a sip is not multilateral then it is an eagle. sent4: if something that displaces is a kind of a walkingstick it is not removable. sent5: if something is a puller it does displace and it is not a walkingstick.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the pyroelectricity is a sip and is not multilateral is wrong.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the pyroelectricity is a puller.; sent5 -> int2: the pyroelectricity displaces but it is not a walkingstick if it is a kind of a puller.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the pyroelectricity displaces but it is not a walkingstick.; sent1 -> int4: if the pyroelectricity displaces and is not a walkingstick it is not removable.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the pyroelectricity is not removable.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that that the pyroelectricity is removable is correct.; int5 & assump2 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the pyroelectricity sips and is not multilateral.; sent3 -> int8: the pyroelectricity is a kind of an eagle if it sips and is non-multilateral.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the pyroelectricity does eagle.; [assump2] & int9 -> int10: if the pyroelectricity is removable then it does eagle.; int10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if that it is removable is right then it does eagle is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: something that displaces and is not a kind of a walkingstick is not removable. sent2: if that the pyroelectricity is a sip and is not multilateral is false the fact that it is a kind of a puller hold. sent3: if a sip is not multilateral then it is an eagle. sent4: if something that displaces is a kind of a walkingstick it is not removable. sent5: if something is a puller it does displace and it is not a walkingstick. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the pyroelectricity is a sip and is not multilateral is wrong.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the pyroelectricity is a puller.; sent5 -> int2: the pyroelectricity displaces but it is not a walkingstick if it is a kind of a puller.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the pyroelectricity displaces but it is not a walkingstick.; sent1 -> int4: if the pyroelectricity displaces and is not a walkingstick it is not removable.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the pyroelectricity is not removable.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that that the pyroelectricity is removable is correct.; int5 & assump2 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the pyroelectricity sips and is not multilateral.; sent3 -> int8: the pyroelectricity is a kind of an eagle if it sips and is non-multilateral.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the pyroelectricity does eagle.; [assump2] & int9 -> int10: if the pyroelectricity is removable then it does eagle.; int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__