the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of nonviolent thing that is a tourist is not correct does not hold.
sent1: the fact that something is nonviolent and it is a tourist does not hold if it does not sentimentalise rummer. sent2: the rummer is not non-splashy but it does not sentimentalise rummer.
sent2 -> int1: the rummer does not sentimentalise rummer.; sent1 -> int2: if the rummer does not sentimentalise rummer that it is nonviolent and it is a tourist is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the rummer is both nonviolent and a tourist is not correct.; int3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of nonviolent thing that is a tourist is not correct does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is nonviolent and it is a tourist does not hold if it does not sentimentalise rummer. sent2: the rummer is not non-splashy but it does not sentimentalise rummer. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the rummer does not sentimentalise rummer.; sent1 -> int2: if the rummer does not sentimentalise rummer that it is nonviolent and it is a tourist is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the rummer is both nonviolent and a tourist is not correct.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__