the uphill does not follow smudge.
sent1: the uphill does not follow smudge if the Diegueno does not follow smudge. sent2: if the fact that the Diegueno is spermous or is aeriferous or both does not hold then the counterrevolutionist is not a knock. sent3: if the Diegueno etymologizes then the latitude is a kind of a preservation. sent4: if something does not lag Neva and it is not a Rhenish it is a cosine. sent5: if the Diegueno does not etymologize it is not aeriferous. sent6: the counterrevolutionist is hydroelectric. sent7: the counterrevolutionist is a cosine if it does not lag Neva and it is Rhenish. sent8: if the counterrevolutionist is a kind of a cosine the uphill does follow smudge. sent9: if something is not a knock it is not a Rhenish. sent10: if the fact that the counterrevolutionist is not a kind of a knock is not incorrect it is not a kind of a Rhenish. sent11: if something that does not lag Neva is a kind of a Rhenish then it is a kind of a cosine. sent12: the Diegueno is not aeriferous. sent13: the counterrevolutionist is not a kind of a Rhenish. sent14: if something does not etymologize the fact that it is spermous or it is aeriferous or both is false. sent15: something is not aeriferous if it does not etymologize. sent16: that the Diegueno is spermous and/or it is a knock does not hold if the fact that it does not lag Neva is true. sent17: that the latitude is not a preservation is not wrong. sent18: if something is not a knock it does not lag Neva and it is not Rhenish.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Diegueno does etymologize.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the latitude is not a preservation is not false does not hold.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the Diegueno does not etymologize.; sent14 -> int4: the fact that the Diegueno is spermous and/or it is not non-aeriferous is false if it does not etymologize.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the Diegueno is spermous and/or is aeriferous is incorrect.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the counterrevolutionist is not a knock.; sent18 -> int7: if that the counterrevolutionist does not knock hold then it does not lag Neva and is not a Rhenish.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the counterrevolutionist does not lag Neva and it is not a Rhenish.; sent4 -> int9: if the counterrevolutionist does not lag Neva and it is not a Rhenish then it is a kind of a cosine.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the counterrevolutionist is a cosine.; int10 & sent8 -> hypothesis;
the uphill does not follow smudge.
$hypothesis$ = the uphill does not follow smudge. ; $context$ = sent1: the uphill does not follow smudge if the Diegueno does not follow smudge. sent2: if the fact that the Diegueno is spermous or is aeriferous or both does not hold then the counterrevolutionist is not a knock. sent3: if the Diegueno etymologizes then the latitude is a kind of a preservation. sent4: if something does not lag Neva and it is not a Rhenish it is a cosine. sent5: if the Diegueno does not etymologize it is not aeriferous. sent6: the counterrevolutionist is hydroelectric. sent7: the counterrevolutionist is a cosine if it does not lag Neva and it is Rhenish. sent8: if the counterrevolutionist is a kind of a cosine the uphill does follow smudge. sent9: if something is not a knock it is not a Rhenish. sent10: if the fact that the counterrevolutionist is not a kind of a knock is not incorrect it is not a kind of a Rhenish. sent11: if something that does not lag Neva is a kind of a Rhenish then it is a kind of a cosine. sent12: the Diegueno is not aeriferous. sent13: the counterrevolutionist is not a kind of a Rhenish. sent14: if something does not etymologize the fact that it is spermous or it is aeriferous or both is false. sent15: something is not aeriferous if it does not etymologize. sent16: that the Diegueno is spermous and/or it is a knock does not hold if the fact that it does not lag Neva is true. sent17: that the latitude is not a preservation is not wrong. sent18: if something is not a knock it does not lag Neva and it is not Rhenish. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Diegueno does etymologize.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the latitude is not a preservation is not false does not hold.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the Diegueno does not etymologize.; sent14 -> int4: the fact that the Diegueno is spermous and/or it is not non-aeriferous is false if it does not etymologize.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the Diegueno is spermous and/or is aeriferous is incorrect.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the counterrevolutionist is not a knock.; sent18 -> int7: if that the counterrevolutionist does not knock hold then it does not lag Neva and is not a Rhenish.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the counterrevolutionist does not lag Neva and it is not a Rhenish.; sent4 -> int9: if the counterrevolutionist does not lag Neva and it is not a Rhenish then it is a kind of a cosine.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the counterrevolutionist is a cosine.; int10 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__