that if the pfannkuchen does not chomp animalization then the porthole does gather does not hold.
sent1: the stem-winder does chomp animalization if the pfannkuchen does not chomp animalization and is not a Parthian. sent2: that the Marine is not electromagnetic if the Marine is a kind of a stegosaur hold. sent3: if there are non-Parthian things either the stem-winder is a gather or it chomps animalization or both. sent4: the pfannkuchen chomps inconclusiveness. sent5: if the pfannkuchen does chomp animalization then the porthole gathers. sent6: something chomps inconclusiveness and it is a gather if that it does not hide is not wrong. sent7: there is something such that it does not chomp animalization. sent8: the Lamarckian is a kind of a menadione if the stem-winder is Parthian but not a gather. sent9: if something is a gather then it does not chomp animalization and it is not a kind of a Parthian. sent10: the pfannkuchen chomps animalization if the stem-winder does chomp inconclusiveness. sent11: the generalissimo is a gather. sent12: the drawnwork does not chomp inconclusiveness. sent13: the Marine is a stegosaur or does not tarnish Phyllostomus or both. sent14: if there exists something such that it is not a gather then the stem-winder is not non-Parthian or it chomps inconclusiveness or both. sent15: if the stem-winder is Parthian then that the pfannkuchen chomps animalization is not incorrect. sent16: either the pfannkuchen does gather or it does chomp animalization or both. sent17: if that the Marine is not electromagnetic is not wrong then that it is a doped that repents toadflax is wrong. sent18: if something does not tarnish Phyllostomus then it is not electromagnetic. sent19: if that the Marine is a kind of a doped that does repent toadflax is false then the fact that it does not repent toadflax is correct. sent20: something is a gather. sent21: the stem-winder chomps animalization or it is a gather or both if there are non-Parthian things. sent22: the stem-winder chomps animalization if the pfannkuchen is Parthian.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the porthole is not a kind of a gather.; assump2 -> int1: something is not a gather.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: either the stem-winder is a Parthian or it chomps inconclusiveness or both.; int2 & sent15 & sent10 -> int3: the pfannkuchen chomps animalization.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the pfannkuchen does not chomp animalization is not false.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the porthole is a gather.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the stem-winder chomps animalization.
sent9 -> int6: if the pfannkuchen does gather then it does not chomp animalization and is not a kind of a Parthian.; sent6 -> int7: if the pfannkuchen is not a hidden then it chomps inconclusiveness and it does gather.; sent18 -> int8: if the Marine does not tarnish Phyllostomus then it is not electromagnetic.; sent13 & sent2 & int8 -> int9: the Marine is not electromagnetic.; sent17 & int9 -> int10: that the Marine is a kind of a doped that repents toadflax does not hold.; sent19 & int10 -> int11: the Marine does not repent toadflax.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that it does not repent toadflax.;
$hypothesis$ = that if the pfannkuchen does not chomp animalization then the porthole does gather does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the stem-winder does chomp animalization if the pfannkuchen does not chomp animalization and is not a Parthian. sent2: that the Marine is not electromagnetic if the Marine is a kind of a stegosaur hold. sent3: if there are non-Parthian things either the stem-winder is a gather or it chomps animalization or both. sent4: the pfannkuchen chomps inconclusiveness. sent5: if the pfannkuchen does chomp animalization then the porthole gathers. sent6: something chomps inconclusiveness and it is a gather if that it does not hide is not wrong. sent7: there is something such that it does not chomp animalization. sent8: the Lamarckian is a kind of a menadione if the stem-winder is Parthian but not a gather. sent9: if something is a gather then it does not chomp animalization and it is not a kind of a Parthian. sent10: the pfannkuchen chomps animalization if the stem-winder does chomp inconclusiveness. sent11: the generalissimo is a gather. sent12: the drawnwork does not chomp inconclusiveness. sent13: the Marine is a stegosaur or does not tarnish Phyllostomus or both. sent14: if there exists something such that it is not a gather then the stem-winder is not non-Parthian or it chomps inconclusiveness or both. sent15: if the stem-winder is Parthian then that the pfannkuchen chomps animalization is not incorrect. sent16: either the pfannkuchen does gather or it does chomp animalization or both. sent17: if that the Marine is not electromagnetic is not wrong then that it is a doped that repents toadflax is wrong. sent18: if something does not tarnish Phyllostomus then it is not electromagnetic. sent19: if that the Marine is a kind of a doped that does repent toadflax is false then the fact that it does not repent toadflax is correct. sent20: something is a gather. sent21: the stem-winder chomps animalization or it is a gather or both if there are non-Parthian things. sent22: the stem-winder chomps animalization if the pfannkuchen is Parthian. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the porthole is not a kind of a gather.; assump2 -> int1: something is not a gather.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: either the stem-winder is a Parthian or it chomps inconclusiveness or both.; int2 & sent15 & sent10 -> int3: the pfannkuchen chomps animalization.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the pfannkuchen does not chomp animalization is not false.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the porthole is a gather.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__