the fact that the Bullfinch is anguine but it is not a isoleucine does not hold.
sent1: the balm is not a isoleucine if that it does not brim and it is a isoleucine is incorrect. sent2: the Bullfinch is anguine and is not a isoleucine if the filer is not a kind of a Columbus. sent3: the filer testifies U. sent4: the balm is a kind of an adequacy and it does unbend. sent5: something is an adequacy if the fact that it is not anguine and it is not an adequacy is incorrect. sent6: if the filer is a kind of an adequacy and is a kind of a Columbus the Bullfinch is not a Columbus. sent7: something is an adequacy and it is a Columbus if it does not testify U. sent8: that the balm is a dope and it does testify U does not hold if that it does not brim is not false. sent9: the balm does not testify U if the fact that it is a dope that does testify U is incorrect. sent10: the balm is not an adequacy if there is something such that it is a kind of a Columbus that testifies U. sent11: The U testifies filer. sent12: that something is not non-anguine and not a isoleucine is false if it is not a Columbus. sent13: something is a write-in. sent14: if the fact that something unbends and testifies U is incorrect it does not testifies U. sent15: if the fact that the balm is not a isoleucine hold then the fact that the filer is non-anguine thing that is not an adequacy does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the filer is a Columbus.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the filer is a Columbus and it does testify U.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is a Columbus and testifies U.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the balm is not an adequacy.; sent4 -> int4: the balm is an adequacy.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the filer is not a kind of a Columbus is right.; int6 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the bonobo does not unbend.
sent5 -> int7: if that that the filer is non-anguine thing that is not a kind of an adequacy hold does not hold it is an adequacy.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Bullfinch is anguine but it is not a isoleucine does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the balm is not a isoleucine if that it does not brim and it is a isoleucine is incorrect. sent2: the Bullfinch is anguine and is not a isoleucine if the filer is not a kind of a Columbus. sent3: the filer testifies U. sent4: the balm is a kind of an adequacy and it does unbend. sent5: something is an adequacy if the fact that it is not anguine and it is not an adequacy is incorrect. sent6: if the filer is a kind of an adequacy and is a kind of a Columbus the Bullfinch is not a Columbus. sent7: something is an adequacy and it is a Columbus if it does not testify U. sent8: that the balm is a dope and it does testify U does not hold if that it does not brim is not false. sent9: the balm does not testify U if the fact that it is a dope that does testify U is incorrect. sent10: the balm is not an adequacy if there is something such that it is a kind of a Columbus that testifies U. sent11: The U testifies filer. sent12: that something is not non-anguine and not a isoleucine is false if it is not a Columbus. sent13: something is a write-in. sent14: if the fact that something unbends and testifies U is incorrect it does not testifies U. sent15: if the fact that the balm is not a isoleucine hold then the fact that the filer is non-anguine thing that is not an adequacy does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the filer is a Columbus.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the filer is a Columbus and it does testify U.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is a Columbus and testifies U.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the balm is not an adequacy.; sent4 -> int4: the balm is an adequacy.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the filer is not a kind of a Columbus is right.; int6 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__