that if the great-nephew does not sideline huffiness the croissant does not confine bunghole and it is not a kind of a reclusiveness is incorrect.
sent1: the boomer is not a Adenium but it confines Lennon. sent2: the great-nephew does not sideline huffiness and it does not confine bunghole if the croissant is a reclusiveness. sent3: the croissant does not sideline huffiness if the fact that the boomer is a kind of a reclusiveness that does confine bunghole is not true. sent4: the croissant does not confine bunghole and is not a kind of a reclusiveness if there exists something such that it does not sideline huffiness. sent5: if something does not sideline huffiness the croissant does not confine bunghole. sent6: if the great-nephew does sideline huffiness then the croissant does not confine bunghole and is not a kind of a reclusiveness. sent7: something is a kind of a rosemary that is a Rochambeau if it is not a Adenium. sent8: there is something such that it does sideline huffiness. sent9: if the boomer is a rosemary then it is a kind of a ligand. sent10: something does not ridicule unknowingness if it does not ridicule unknowingness or is not creedal or both. sent11: if something does not ridicule unknowingness then that it is a reclusiveness that confines bunghole is not correct. sent12: a ligand does not ridicule unknowingness or is not creedal or both.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the great-nephew does not sideline huffiness.; assump1 -> int1: something does not sideline huffiness.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the croissant does not confine bunghole and is not a reclusiveness.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;
the croissant does not sideline huffiness.
sent11 -> int3: if the boomer does not ridicule unknowingness then the fact that it is a reclusiveness and it does confine bunghole is wrong.; sent10 -> int4: if either the boomer does not ridicule unknowingness or it is not creedal or both then it does not ridicule unknowingness.; sent12 -> int5: the boomer does not ridicule unknowingness or it is not creedal or both if it is a ligand.; sent7 -> int6: if the boomer is not a Adenium it is a rosemary that is a Rochambeau.; sent1 -> int7: the boomer is not a kind of a Adenium.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the boomer is a kind of a rosemary that is a Rochambeau.; int8 -> int9: the boomer is a rosemary.; sent9 & int9 -> int10: the boomer is a ligand.; int5 & int10 -> int11: the boomer does not ridicule unknowingness or is not creedal or both.; int4 & int11 -> int12: the boomer does not ridicule unknowingness.; int3 & int12 -> int13: that the boomer is a kind of a reclusiveness and confines bunghole is wrong.; sent3 & int13 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the great-nephew does not sideline huffiness the croissant does not confine bunghole and it is not a kind of a reclusiveness is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the boomer is not a Adenium but it confines Lennon. sent2: the great-nephew does not sideline huffiness and it does not confine bunghole if the croissant is a reclusiveness. sent3: the croissant does not sideline huffiness if the fact that the boomer is a kind of a reclusiveness that does confine bunghole is not true. sent4: the croissant does not confine bunghole and is not a kind of a reclusiveness if there exists something such that it does not sideline huffiness. sent5: if something does not sideline huffiness the croissant does not confine bunghole. sent6: if the great-nephew does sideline huffiness then the croissant does not confine bunghole and is not a kind of a reclusiveness. sent7: something is a kind of a rosemary that is a Rochambeau if it is not a Adenium. sent8: there is something such that it does sideline huffiness. sent9: if the boomer is a rosemary then it is a kind of a ligand. sent10: something does not ridicule unknowingness if it does not ridicule unknowingness or is not creedal or both. sent11: if something does not ridicule unknowingness then that it is a reclusiveness that confines bunghole is not correct. sent12: a ligand does not ridicule unknowingness or is not creedal or both. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the great-nephew does not sideline huffiness.; assump1 -> int1: something does not sideline huffiness.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the croissant does not confine bunghole and is not a reclusiveness.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__