that if the damask reads coldness the acarine does not count and is ungenerous is incorrect.
sent1: the acarine is ungenerous. sent2: if the coldness is not a count the acarine is ungenerous. sent3: the damask does not read coldness but it does deafen damask if the gadoid does not read coldness. sent4: the acarine is not a kind of a count but it is ungenerous if the coldness is not a kind of a count. sent5: the damask does not read coldness if the gadoid reads chokehold and/or deafens damask. sent6: the damask does not count if the acarine is ungenerous and/or reads coldness. sent7: the coldness is not a count if the fact that the gadoid does not deafen damask is right. sent8: the acarine is a kind of a count that is ungenerous. sent9: if the fact that the gadoid reads chokehold hold then the fact that the damask does not read coldness is not false. sent10: the acarine does read chokehold. sent11: the coldness is not a count but it does deafen damask if the gadoid does read chokehold. sent12: the acarine is ungenerous if the damask does read coldness. sent13: the gadoid counts and/or it reads chokehold. sent14: if the damask reads coldness then the acarine does count and it is ungenerous. sent15: the acarine is a count and it is ungenerous if the coldness is not a count.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the damask reads coldness.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gadoid does deafen damask.; assump1 -> int1: the gadoid does read chokehold and/or deafens damask.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the damask does not read coldness.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the gadoid does not deafen damask.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the coldness does not count.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the acarine is not a count and is ungenerous.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the damask reads coldness the acarine does not count and is ungenerous is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the acarine is ungenerous. sent2: if the coldness is not a count the acarine is ungenerous. sent3: the damask does not read coldness but it does deafen damask if the gadoid does not read coldness. sent4: the acarine is not a kind of a count but it is ungenerous if the coldness is not a kind of a count. sent5: the damask does not read coldness if the gadoid reads chokehold and/or deafens damask. sent6: the damask does not count if the acarine is ungenerous and/or reads coldness. sent7: the coldness is not a count if the fact that the gadoid does not deafen damask is right. sent8: the acarine is a kind of a count that is ungenerous. sent9: if the fact that the gadoid reads chokehold hold then the fact that the damask does not read coldness is not false. sent10: the acarine does read chokehold. sent11: the coldness is not a count but it does deafen damask if the gadoid does read chokehold. sent12: the acarine is ungenerous if the damask does read coldness. sent13: the gadoid counts and/or it reads chokehold. sent14: if the damask reads coldness then the acarine does count and it is ungenerous. sent15: the acarine is a count and it is ungenerous if the coldness is not a count. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the damask reads coldness.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gadoid does deafen damask.; assump1 -> int1: the gadoid does read chokehold and/or deafens damask.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the damask does not read coldness.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the gadoid does not deafen damask.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the coldness does not count.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the acarine is not a count and is ungenerous.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__