that if the echinococcus does not acquaint jack then the fact that that the submariner is not a cookbook and does patrol tailback is not correct is true does not hold.
sent1: if the echinococcus does not acquaint jack then the submariner is not a kind of a cookbook but it does patrol tailback. sent2: the submariner is not a USN. sent3: the tailback is a kind of a cookbook. sent4: that the echinococcus is a USN and does acquaint jack does not hold if the submariner is not a kind of a cookbook. sent5: the submariner is not a cookbook. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Mantispidae. sent7: something that does not patrol tailback and is not a cookbook is not nonalcoholic. sent8: there exists something such that it does patrol tailback. sent9: that the submariner is a cookbook that patrols tailback is wrong if the fact that the echinococcus does not acquaint jack hold. sent10: if that that something does not acquaint fugue but it acquaints jack is correct is incorrect it is a USN. sent11: the fact that the submariner patrols tailback if something acquaints jack but it is not a kind of a cookbook is not wrong. sent12: the submariner is ameboid if it is a kind of a USN. sent13: something does patrol tailback and it is a USN. sent14: the echinococcus acquaints jack if something does patrol tailback but it is not a USN. sent15: the submariner is not a cookbook but it is soft.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the submariner is not a kind of a cookbook but it patrols tailback.; assump1 -> int1: the submariner does patrol tailback.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the submariner patrols tailback but it is not a kind of a USN.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that it does patrol tailback and is not a USN.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the echinococcus does acquaint jack.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the echinococcus does not acquaint jack hold.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the fact that that the submariner is not a cookbook and does patrol tailback hold is false is correct.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis;
something is ameboid but it is not nonalcoholic.
sent10 -> int7: if the fact that the submariner does not acquaint fugue but it does acquaint jack is not right it is a kind of a USN.; sent7 -> int8: if the submariner does not patrol tailback and is not a cookbook then it is not nonalcoholic.;
$hypothesis$ = that if the echinococcus does not acquaint jack then the fact that that the submariner is not a cookbook and does patrol tailback is not correct is true does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the echinococcus does not acquaint jack then the submariner is not a kind of a cookbook but it does patrol tailback. sent2: the submariner is not a USN. sent3: the tailback is a kind of a cookbook. sent4: that the echinococcus is a USN and does acquaint jack does not hold if the submariner is not a kind of a cookbook. sent5: the submariner is not a cookbook. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Mantispidae. sent7: something that does not patrol tailback and is not a cookbook is not nonalcoholic. sent8: there exists something such that it does patrol tailback. sent9: that the submariner is a cookbook that patrols tailback is wrong if the fact that the echinococcus does not acquaint jack hold. sent10: if that that something does not acquaint fugue but it acquaints jack is correct is incorrect it is a USN. sent11: the fact that the submariner patrols tailback if something acquaints jack but it is not a kind of a cookbook is not wrong. sent12: the submariner is ameboid if it is a kind of a USN. sent13: something does patrol tailback and it is a USN. sent14: the echinococcus acquaints jack if something does patrol tailback but it is not a USN. sent15: the submariner is not a cookbook but it is soft. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the submariner is not a kind of a cookbook but it patrols tailback.; assump1 -> int1: the submariner does patrol tailback.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the submariner patrols tailback but it is not a kind of a USN.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that it does patrol tailback and is not a USN.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the echinococcus does acquaint jack.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the echinococcus does not acquaint jack hold.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the fact that that the submariner is not a cookbook and does patrol tailback hold is false is correct.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__