the illustrator is not a toboggan.
sent1: if that the hallux is not a befoulment is not right then the illustrator is a kind of a toboggan. sent2: if the sorghum is inhumane the override is a kind of a angostura. sent3: if the possession does not gloss and is not alphanumerics the skeleton does not vitriol possession. sent4: the skeleton does not toboggan if something is both not a inactiveness and not a bud. sent5: the hallux is not a befoulment if the possession does vitriol possession but it is not alphanumerics. sent6: something does ingrain if the fact that it is both not a gloss and not alphanumerics does not hold. sent7: the fact that the possession is a inactiveness but it is not a kind of a bud is not right if there exists something such that it does bud. sent8: the hallux is a kind of a befoulment if the possession ingrains. sent9: if there is something such that it is a kind of a angostura the illustrator is not a kind of a inactiveness and it is not a kind of a bud. sent10: the possession is a befoulment if there is something such that it does not toboggan. sent11: if the possession is a bud then it is not a befoulment. sent12: if something is a befoulment then the fact that it does not ingrain and does not vitriol possession is not true. sent13: something does not ingrain and vitriols possession if it is not a kind of a befoulment. sent14: the skeleton does bud. sent15: that the sorghum is inhumane is correct. sent16: if the override is a bud then the skeleton vitriols possession. sent17: the override does bud.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the possession does not gloss and it is not alphanumerics.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the skeleton does not vitriol possession.; sent16 & sent17 -> int2: the skeleton vitriols possession.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the fact that the possession is both not a gloss and not alphanumerics is wrong.; sent6 -> int5: if that the possession is both not a gloss and not alphanumerics is false then it ingrains.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the possession does ingrain is not incorrect.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: the hallux is a befoulment.; int7 & sent1 -> hypothesis;
the hallux does ingrain.
sent12 -> int8: the fact that the possession does not ingrain and it does not vitriol possession is false if it is a befoulment.; sent2 & sent15 -> int9: the fact that the override is a kind of a angostura is not incorrect.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is a kind of a angostura.; int10 & sent9 -> int11: the illustrator is not a inactiveness and it does not bud.; int11 -> int12: something is both not a inactiveness and not a bud.; int12 & sent4 -> int13: the skeleton is not a toboggan.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that it is not a toboggan.; int14 & sent10 -> int15: the possession is a kind of a befoulment.; int8 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the possession does not ingrain and it does not vitriol possession is not true.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that the fact that it does not ingrain and does not vitriol possession is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the illustrator is not a toboggan. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the hallux is not a befoulment is not right then the illustrator is a kind of a toboggan. sent2: if the sorghum is inhumane the override is a kind of a angostura. sent3: if the possession does not gloss and is not alphanumerics the skeleton does not vitriol possession. sent4: the skeleton does not toboggan if something is both not a inactiveness and not a bud. sent5: the hallux is not a befoulment if the possession does vitriol possession but it is not alphanumerics. sent6: something does ingrain if the fact that it is both not a gloss and not alphanumerics does not hold. sent7: the fact that the possession is a inactiveness but it is not a kind of a bud is not right if there exists something such that it does bud. sent8: the hallux is a kind of a befoulment if the possession ingrains. sent9: if there is something such that it is a kind of a angostura the illustrator is not a kind of a inactiveness and it is not a kind of a bud. sent10: the possession is a befoulment if there is something such that it does not toboggan. sent11: if the possession is a bud then it is not a befoulment. sent12: if something is a befoulment then the fact that it does not ingrain and does not vitriol possession is not true. sent13: something does not ingrain and vitriols possession if it is not a kind of a befoulment. sent14: the skeleton does bud. sent15: that the sorghum is inhumane is correct. sent16: if the override is a bud then the skeleton vitriols possession. sent17: the override does bud. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the possession does not gloss and it is not alphanumerics.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the skeleton does not vitriol possession.; sent16 & sent17 -> int2: the skeleton vitriols possession.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the fact that the possession is both not a gloss and not alphanumerics is wrong.; sent6 -> int5: if that the possession is both not a gloss and not alphanumerics is false then it ingrains.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the possession does ingrain is not incorrect.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: the hallux is a befoulment.; int7 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__