that if the basswood is serious that the trajectory does brazen contentment but it is not a Selkirk is incorrect is false.
sent1: if the defaulter is not a Pasternak the basswood is both not anamorphic and not a Pasternak. sent2: the trajectory brazens curfew but it is not serious. sent3: if the fact that the defaulter is not a Pasternak is true then the basswood is not anamorphic. sent4: if the basswood is both anamorphic and not a Pasternak it is not serious. sent5: if the basswood is not anamorphic and it is not a kind of a Pasternak it is not serious. sent6: the defaulter is not a Pasternak if the trajectory does brazen contentment but it is not a kind of a Selkirk. sent7: the trajectory is not a Selkirk. sent8: the fact that the trajectory is a Pasternak and is not a kind of a Selkirk is not true. sent9: the fact that something does brazen contentment but it does not misremember is incorrect if that it is serious hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trajectory does brazen contentment and is not a Selkirk.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: that the defaulter is not a kind of a Pasternak is not wrong.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the basswood is non-anamorphic thing that is not a kind of a Pasternak.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the basswood is not serious.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the basswood is serious.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the trajectory does brazen contentment but it is not a Selkirk does not hold.; [assump2] & int5 -> hypothesis;
that the defaulter brazens contentment but it does not misremember does not hold.
sent9 -> int6: if the defaulter is serious then that it brazens contentment and it does not misremember does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = that if the basswood is serious that the trajectory does brazen contentment but it is not a Selkirk is incorrect is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the defaulter is not a Pasternak the basswood is both not anamorphic and not a Pasternak. sent2: the trajectory brazens curfew but it is not serious. sent3: if the fact that the defaulter is not a Pasternak is true then the basswood is not anamorphic. sent4: if the basswood is both anamorphic and not a Pasternak it is not serious. sent5: if the basswood is not anamorphic and it is not a kind of a Pasternak it is not serious. sent6: the defaulter is not a Pasternak if the trajectory does brazen contentment but it is not a kind of a Selkirk. sent7: the trajectory is not a Selkirk. sent8: the fact that the trajectory is a Pasternak and is not a kind of a Selkirk is not true. sent9: the fact that something does brazen contentment but it does not misremember is incorrect if that it is serious hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trajectory does brazen contentment and is not a Selkirk.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: that the defaulter is not a kind of a Pasternak is not wrong.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the basswood is non-anamorphic thing that is not a kind of a Pasternak.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the basswood is not serious.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the basswood is serious.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the trajectory does brazen contentment but it is not a Selkirk does not hold.; [assump2] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__