that the lantern is a kind of duodenal thing that does not axe interruption does not hold.
sent1: the apprehender is a kind of a shortbread. sent2: something is a verticillium if it is a manor. sent3: there is something such that that it is abbatial and is a kind of a twinge is not right. sent4: something is a kind of a Ulex that does not lease culmination if it is not a pestle. sent5: The event does not elaborate apprehender. sent6: if there is something such that that it is a verticillium and it is abbatial does not hold then the Luxemburger is non-duodenal. sent7: something is an eyespot and is hymenopterous. sent8: that the Luxemburger is abbatial but it is not a kind of an eyespot is not correct. sent9: the fact that that the hypha is an eyespot is not wrong does not hold if it is not a verticillium. sent10: if something does twinge the hypha is a manor. sent11: that the Luxemburger is abbatial but it does not twinge is not correct if the lantern does splutter. sent12: the apprehender does not elaborate event. sent13: if something is not a manor then it does not splutter. sent14: the fact that the mealworm is unlikable and it is hymenopterous does not hold. sent15: something that does not splutter is duodenal and does not axe interruption. sent16: there is something such that that it is polymorphous and it is abyssal does not hold. sent17: if there is something such that that it is a kind of abbatial thing that is not a twinge is false then the hypha is a manor. sent18: if the hypha is a verticillium that the apprehender is both an eyespot and not a manor is false. sent19: if there is something such that that it is both an eyespot and hymenopterous does not hold then the hypha is not a verticillium. sent20: if the apprehender does splutter that the lantern does elaborate event and it axes interruption does not hold. sent21: if the apprehender does axe interruption then that that the lantern is a kind of an eyespot and it is a manor is not wrong does not hold. sent22: if the apprehender does not elaborate event that it is an eyespot and it is hymenopterous does not hold. sent23: the hypha is unbreakable. sent24: there is something such that that it is both a Pamlico and fissile is false. sent25: the lantern is abbatial.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lantern does splutter.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the Luxemburger is both abbatial and not a twinge is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-abbatial and it does not twinge is not right.; int2 & sent17 -> int3: the hypha is a kind of a manor.; sent2 -> int4: that if the hypha is the manor the hypha is a kind of a verticillium is not wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the hypha is a kind of a verticillium.; sent22 & sent12 -> int6: that the apprehender is an eyespot and it is hymenopterous is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it is a kind of an eyespot and is hymenopterous is false.; int7 & sent19 -> int8: the hypha is not a verticillium.; int5 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the lantern does not splutter.; sent15 -> int11: the lantern is duodenal and does not axe interruption if it does not splutter.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the lantern is duodenal and does not axe interruption is not correct.
sent13 -> int12: that the Luxemburger does not splutter is right if it is not a manor.;
$hypothesis$ = that the lantern is a kind of duodenal thing that does not axe interruption does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the apprehender is a kind of a shortbread. sent2: something is a verticillium if it is a manor. sent3: there is something such that that it is abbatial and is a kind of a twinge is not right. sent4: something is a kind of a Ulex that does not lease culmination if it is not a pestle. sent5: The event does not elaborate apprehender. sent6: if there is something such that that it is a verticillium and it is abbatial does not hold then the Luxemburger is non-duodenal. sent7: something is an eyespot and is hymenopterous. sent8: that the Luxemburger is abbatial but it is not a kind of an eyespot is not correct. sent9: the fact that that the hypha is an eyespot is not wrong does not hold if it is not a verticillium. sent10: if something does twinge the hypha is a manor. sent11: that the Luxemburger is abbatial but it does not twinge is not correct if the lantern does splutter. sent12: the apprehender does not elaborate event. sent13: if something is not a manor then it does not splutter. sent14: the fact that the mealworm is unlikable and it is hymenopterous does not hold. sent15: something that does not splutter is duodenal and does not axe interruption. sent16: there is something such that that it is polymorphous and it is abyssal does not hold. sent17: if there is something such that that it is a kind of abbatial thing that is not a twinge is false then the hypha is a manor. sent18: if the hypha is a verticillium that the apprehender is both an eyespot and not a manor is false. sent19: if there is something such that that it is both an eyespot and hymenopterous does not hold then the hypha is not a verticillium. sent20: if the apprehender does splutter that the lantern does elaborate event and it axes interruption does not hold. sent21: if the apprehender does axe interruption then that that the lantern is a kind of an eyespot and it is a manor is not wrong does not hold. sent22: if the apprehender does not elaborate event that it is an eyespot and it is hymenopterous does not hold. sent23: the hypha is unbreakable. sent24: there is something such that that it is both a Pamlico and fissile is false. sent25: the lantern is abbatial. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lantern does splutter.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the Luxemburger is both abbatial and not a twinge is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-abbatial and it does not twinge is not right.; int2 & sent17 -> int3: the hypha is a kind of a manor.; sent2 -> int4: that if the hypha is the manor the hypha is a kind of a verticillium is not wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the hypha is a kind of a verticillium.; sent22 & sent12 -> int6: that the apprehender is an eyespot and it is hymenopterous is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it is a kind of an eyespot and is hymenopterous is false.; int7 & sent19 -> int8: the hypha is not a verticillium.; int5 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the lantern does not splutter.; sent15 -> int11: the lantern is duodenal and does not axe interruption if it does not splutter.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__