that the taxman does not copy Marvell is not false.
sent1: the rigger is not bibless. sent2: if the rigger is not a vasotomy and it is not a kind of a difficulty then the abbot is a kind of a vasotomy. sent3: if the derivation is sociolinguistics the rigger is not a vasotomy and it is not a difficulty. sent4: the fact that something glamorizes pediment and is not bibless is not correct if it is a kind of a vasotomy. sent5: if the taxman is circadian then it does not copy Marvell. sent6: if the dresser dominates smell then the cologne dominates hereditarianism. sent7: if either the cologne does dominate hereditarianism or it is not nominalistic or both then the becket does not dominate rigger. sent8: the taxman does copy Marvell if that the abbot does not glamorize pediment but it is circadian does not hold. sent9: if the interpreter is not binoculars then the premolar is circadian. sent10: if that something is a kind of a Mannheim and/or it is bibless is not right it is not circadian. sent11: the taxman does copy Marvell if the abbot is not circadian. sent12: if the fact that the fact that something is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both hold is not right then it is non-binoculars. sent13: if the fact that the rigger is not bibless is right the fact that either the interpreter is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both is incorrect. sent14: the cologne does dominate hereditarianism if the dresser dominate hereditarianism. sent15: the premolar does not twine. sent16: there is something such that it dominates hereditarianism. sent17: if the fact that something glamorizes pediment but it is not bibless does not hold it does not glamorizes pediment. sent18: if that either something is not circadian or it does copy Marvell or both does not hold then it is not bibless. sent19: the dresser does dominate hereditarianism or dominates smell or both if there exists something such that it dominate hereditarianism. sent20: if the rigger is not bibless then the interpreter is a Mannheim. sent21: that the abbot does not glamorize pediment but it is not non-circadian is false if the premolar is non-circadian.
sent12 -> int1: the interpreter is not binoculars if that either it is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both is wrong.; sent13 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that either the interpreter is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the interpreter is not binoculars.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the premolar is circadian.; int4 & sent21 -> int5: the fact that the abbot does not glamorize pediment but it is circadian is wrong.; int5 & sent8 -> hypothesis;
that the taxman does not copy Marvell hold.
sent17 -> int6: the abbot does not glamorize pediment if the fact that it glamorize pediment and it is not bibless is incorrect.; sent4 -> int7: if the abbot is a vasotomy the fact that it glamorizes pediment and it is not bibless does not hold.; sent16 & sent19 -> int8: the dresser does dominate hereditarianism and/or dominates smell.; int8 & sent14 & sent6 -> int9: the cologne dominates hereditarianism.; int9 -> int10: the cologne does dominate hereditarianism and/or it is not nominalistic.; sent7 & int10 -> int11: the becket does not dominate rigger.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that it does not dominate rigger.;
$hypothesis$ = that the taxman does not copy Marvell is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the rigger is not bibless. sent2: if the rigger is not a vasotomy and it is not a kind of a difficulty then the abbot is a kind of a vasotomy. sent3: if the derivation is sociolinguistics the rigger is not a vasotomy and it is not a difficulty. sent4: the fact that something glamorizes pediment and is not bibless is not correct if it is a kind of a vasotomy. sent5: if the taxman is circadian then it does not copy Marvell. sent6: if the dresser dominates smell then the cologne dominates hereditarianism. sent7: if either the cologne does dominate hereditarianism or it is not nominalistic or both then the becket does not dominate rigger. sent8: the taxman does copy Marvell if that the abbot does not glamorize pediment but it is circadian does not hold. sent9: if the interpreter is not binoculars then the premolar is circadian. sent10: if that something is a kind of a Mannheim and/or it is bibless is not right it is not circadian. sent11: the taxman does copy Marvell if the abbot is not circadian. sent12: if the fact that the fact that something is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both hold is not right then it is non-binoculars. sent13: if the fact that the rigger is not bibless is right the fact that either the interpreter is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both is incorrect. sent14: the cologne does dominate hereditarianism if the dresser dominate hereditarianism. sent15: the premolar does not twine. sent16: there is something such that it dominates hereditarianism. sent17: if the fact that something glamorizes pediment but it is not bibless does not hold it does not glamorizes pediment. sent18: if that either something is not circadian or it does copy Marvell or both does not hold then it is not bibless. sent19: the dresser does dominate hereditarianism or dominates smell or both if there exists something such that it dominate hereditarianism. sent20: if the rigger is not bibless then the interpreter is a Mannheim. sent21: that the abbot does not glamorize pediment but it is not non-circadian is false if the premolar is non-circadian. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: the interpreter is not binoculars if that either it is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both is wrong.; sent13 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that either the interpreter is not a Mannheim or it does twine or both is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the interpreter is not binoculars.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the premolar is circadian.; int4 & sent21 -> int5: the fact that the abbot does not glamorize pediment but it is circadian is wrong.; int5 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__