the fact that the digestive is celiac if the ammonia does unwrap ISN is not correct.
sent1: if that that the sharpshooter does not spiel scyphus and does not unwrap Carlsbad is not false does not hold the digestive is celiac. sent2: that the ammonia does not unwrap ISN and does spiel scyphus is incorrect. sent3: that the sharpshooter does spiel scyphus and does not unwrap Carlsbad is not true. sent4: the ammonia spiels scyphus if the sharpshooter unwraps ISN. sent5: the fact that the digestive is not celiac but it unwraps Carlsbad is wrong if the sharpshooter spiels scyphus. sent6: that the sharpshooter is celiac but it does not spiel scyphus does not hold. sent7: the hindfoot spiels scyphus. sent8: if the ammonia does unwrap ISN then that the sharpshooter does not spiel scyphus and it does not unwrap Carlsbad is incorrect. sent9: the muon does unwrap Carlsbad. sent10: if the sharpshooter is celiac the fact that the digestive does not unwrap ISN but it does spiel scyphus is incorrect. sent11: if the digestive is celiac that that the sharpshooter does spiel scyphus but it does not unwrap ISN is incorrect hold. sent12: if something unwraps ISN then it is celiac. sent13: the ammonia is celiac. sent14: the fact that the sharpshooter does increase is not incorrect. sent15: the fact that the sharpshooter does not unwrap Carlsbad but it unwraps ISN is not correct if the ammonia is celiac. sent16: the fact that the digestive does spiel scyphus but it is not celiac does not hold. sent17: that the sharpshooter does spiel scyphus but it does not unwrap Carlsbad is not correct if the ammonia unwraps ISN. sent18: the digestive unwraps Carlsbad. sent19: that the ammonia does not spiel scyphus and does not unwrap ISN is not true. sent20: the fact that the sharpshooter is non-celiac and it does not unwrap Carlsbad is wrong if the digestive does spiel scyphus.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ammonia unwraps ISN.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: that the sharpshooter does not spiel scyphus and it does not unwrap Carlsbad is not right.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the digestive is celiac.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;
the calyptra is celiac.
sent12 -> int3: if the calyptra unwraps ISN it is celiac.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the digestive is celiac if the ammonia does unwrap ISN is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if that that the sharpshooter does not spiel scyphus and does not unwrap Carlsbad is not false does not hold the digestive is celiac. sent2: that the ammonia does not unwrap ISN and does spiel scyphus is incorrect. sent3: that the sharpshooter does spiel scyphus and does not unwrap Carlsbad is not true. sent4: the ammonia spiels scyphus if the sharpshooter unwraps ISN. sent5: the fact that the digestive is not celiac but it unwraps Carlsbad is wrong if the sharpshooter spiels scyphus. sent6: that the sharpshooter is celiac but it does not spiel scyphus does not hold. sent7: the hindfoot spiels scyphus. sent8: if the ammonia does unwrap ISN then that the sharpshooter does not spiel scyphus and it does not unwrap Carlsbad is incorrect. sent9: the muon does unwrap Carlsbad. sent10: if the sharpshooter is celiac the fact that the digestive does not unwrap ISN but it does spiel scyphus is incorrect. sent11: if the digestive is celiac that that the sharpshooter does spiel scyphus but it does not unwrap ISN is incorrect hold. sent12: if something unwraps ISN then it is celiac. sent13: the ammonia is celiac. sent14: the fact that the sharpshooter does increase is not incorrect. sent15: the fact that the sharpshooter does not unwrap Carlsbad but it unwraps ISN is not correct if the ammonia is celiac. sent16: the fact that the digestive does spiel scyphus but it is not celiac does not hold. sent17: that the sharpshooter does spiel scyphus but it does not unwrap Carlsbad is not correct if the ammonia unwraps ISN. sent18: the digestive unwraps Carlsbad. sent19: that the ammonia does not spiel scyphus and does not unwrap ISN is not true. sent20: the fact that the sharpshooter is non-celiac and it does not unwrap Carlsbad is wrong if the digestive does spiel scyphus. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ammonia unwraps ISN.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: that the sharpshooter does not spiel scyphus and it does not unwrap Carlsbad is not right.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the digestive is celiac.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__