that that the voider does chomp podetium but it does not repent clingfish is not correct if the podetium is not a ethnographer is not true.
sent1: if the canister does not repent clingfish the fact that the voider chomps podetium but it does not repent clingfish does not hold. sent2: that the voider is a duplication that repents clingfish does not hold if that the canister does not repents clingfish is correct. sent3: if that something does repent clingfish is not incorrect then it is not a duplication and repents voider. sent4: the canister is not a duplication if it does repent clingfish. sent5: the voider does chomp podetium and does not repent clingfish if the podetium is not a kind of a ethnographer. sent6: if the canister is not a duplication but it does repent voider the fact that the podetium is a ethnographer is not false.
sent3 -> int1: if the canister repents clingfish then it is not a kind of a duplication and repents voider.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the canister repents clingfish.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the canister is not a kind of a duplication but it repents voider.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the podetium is a ethnographer.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the podetium is not a ethnographer.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the canister does not repent clingfish.; sent1 & int5 -> int6: that the voider chomps podetium and does not repent clingfish does not hold.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that that the voider does chomp podetium but it does not repent clingfish is not correct if the podetium is not a ethnographer is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the canister does not repent clingfish the fact that the voider chomps podetium but it does not repent clingfish does not hold. sent2: that the voider is a duplication that repents clingfish does not hold if that the canister does not repents clingfish is correct. sent3: if that something does repent clingfish is not incorrect then it is not a duplication and repents voider. sent4: the canister is not a duplication if it does repent clingfish. sent5: the voider does chomp podetium and does not repent clingfish if the podetium is not a kind of a ethnographer. sent6: if the canister is not a duplication but it does repent voider the fact that the podetium is a ethnographer is not false. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> int1: if the canister repents clingfish then it is not a kind of a duplication and repents voider.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the canister repents clingfish.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the canister is not a kind of a duplication but it repents voider.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the podetium is a ethnographer.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the podetium is not a ethnographer.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the canister does not repent clingfish.; sent1 & int5 -> int6: that the voider chomps podetium and does not repent clingfish does not hold.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__