the Dubliner is practical.
sent1: there exists something such that it horripilates wheelwork. sent2: the cake is a kind of a forefoot and/or it is involuntary if there exists something such that it is defeasible. sent3: the bushing does not reposition and/or it is involuntary if it is not a kind of a AFISR. sent4: if the cake is not defeasible then the Saskatoon does not reposit oriel. sent5: if that the Dubliner does reposit oriel and is not a kind of a AFISR is not correct the Saskatoon is a AFISR. sent6: the fact that that the cake is defeasible thing that is not effervescent is not wrong is wrong. sent7: the bushing is a forefoot. sent8: the Saskatoon is a forefoot if the cake is involuntary. sent9: something is defeasible. sent10: if the fact that the cake is defeasible and is not effervescent is not true then the Saskatoon does not reposit oriel. sent11: the Saskatoon is a kind of a forefoot if the cake is a kind of a forefoot. sent12: the Saskatoon reposits oriel if something that is a AFISR is a forefoot. sent13: the Dubliner is not practical if something does not reposition and/or is involuntary.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bushing is a AFISR.; assump1 & sent7 -> int1: the bushing is both a AFISR and a forefoot.; int1 -> int2: something is a AFISR and it is a forefoot.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the Saskatoon does reposit oriel.; sent10 & sent6 -> int4: the Saskatoon does not reposit oriel.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the bushing is not a AFISR.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the bushing does not reposition or it is involuntary or both.; int7 -> int8: something does not reposition and/or is involuntary.; int8 & sent13 -> hypothesis;
the bushing is not effervescent.
sent9 & sent2 -> int9: the cake is a kind of a forefoot and/or is involuntary.; int9 & sent11 & sent8 -> int10: the Saskatoon is a kind of a forefoot.;
$hypothesis$ = the Dubliner is practical. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it horripilates wheelwork. sent2: the cake is a kind of a forefoot and/or it is involuntary if there exists something such that it is defeasible. sent3: the bushing does not reposition and/or it is involuntary if it is not a kind of a AFISR. sent4: if the cake is not defeasible then the Saskatoon does not reposit oriel. sent5: if that the Dubliner does reposit oriel and is not a kind of a AFISR is not correct the Saskatoon is a AFISR. sent6: the fact that that the cake is defeasible thing that is not effervescent is not wrong is wrong. sent7: the bushing is a forefoot. sent8: the Saskatoon is a forefoot if the cake is involuntary. sent9: something is defeasible. sent10: if the fact that the cake is defeasible and is not effervescent is not true then the Saskatoon does not reposit oriel. sent11: the Saskatoon is a kind of a forefoot if the cake is a kind of a forefoot. sent12: the Saskatoon reposits oriel if something that is a AFISR is a forefoot. sent13: the Dubliner is not practical if something does not reposition and/or is involuntary. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bushing is a AFISR.; assump1 & sent7 -> int1: the bushing is both a AFISR and a forefoot.; int1 -> int2: something is a AFISR and it is a forefoot.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the Saskatoon does reposit oriel.; sent10 & sent6 -> int4: the Saskatoon does not reposit oriel.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the bushing is not a AFISR.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the bushing does not reposition or it is involuntary or both.; int7 -> int8: something does not reposition and/or is involuntary.; int8 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__