the fact that that the pate is not charitable but it is Neapolitan does not hold if the indentation is not tinny is not right.
sent1: the indentation is less. sent2: that the pate is uncharitable and not non-Neapolitan is incorrect if the indentation is tinny. sent3: something slugs lawrencium if it overrides Vespidae. sent4: the fact that the pate is non-Neapolitan thing that is tinny is not true if the mezereon does not override Vespidae. sent5: the indentation is tinny if the mezereon overrides Vespidae. sent6: the fact that the mezereon overrides Vespidae and is a kind of a porker is incorrect if the fact that it is not a Neapolitan hold. sent7: that the pate does not encourage numbness but it overrides Vespidae is wrong if the mezereon is not charitable. sent8: the indentation is charitable. sent9: if the mezereon is not tinny then it does not encourage numbness and is a Neapolitan. sent10: if the pate is charitable then the mezereon is Neapolitan. sent11: the pate overrides Vespidae and it is tinny if the mezereon does not encourage numbness. sent12: if the fact that that the reboxetine does not override Vespidae but it is tinny is right is wrong it does not brazen aluminum. sent13: if the mezereon does not encourage numbness but it is valent the fact that the pate is not a porker is not wrong. sent14: the fact that the indentation is not a porker but it is tinny is false. sent15: if the pate does not override Vespidae but it is a Neapolitan then the mezereon is not tinny. sent16: the fact that the mezereon is a porker hold. sent17: the fact that the pate is not a Neapolitan but it is a porker does not hold if it is not valent. sent18: if the pate does not override Vespidae the mezereon is both not a porker and charitable. sent19: something slugs Javanese if it is a porker. sent20: the fact that something is not charitable but it is a Neapolitan is not true if it is not a porker. sent21: the mezereon does not encourage numbness but it is valent if it does not override Vespidae. sent22: if the mezereon does encourage numbness then the fact that the reboxetine does not override Vespidae and is tinny is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mezereon overrides Vespidae.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the indentation is tinny.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the indentation is not tinny.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the mezereon does not override Vespidae hold.; int3 & sent21 -> int4: the mezereon does not encourage numbness but it is valent.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the pate is not a porker.; sent20 -> int6: if the pate is not a kind of a porker the fact that it is both not charitable and not non-Neapolitan is incorrect.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the pate is both not charitable and a Neapolitan does not hold.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the pate slugs lawrencium.
sent3 -> int8: if the pate does override Vespidae then it slugs lawrencium.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the pate is not charitable but it is Neapolitan does not hold if the indentation is not tinny is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the indentation is less. sent2: that the pate is uncharitable and not non-Neapolitan is incorrect if the indentation is tinny. sent3: something slugs lawrencium if it overrides Vespidae. sent4: the fact that the pate is non-Neapolitan thing that is tinny is not true if the mezereon does not override Vespidae. sent5: the indentation is tinny if the mezereon overrides Vespidae. sent6: the fact that the mezereon overrides Vespidae and is a kind of a porker is incorrect if the fact that it is not a Neapolitan hold. sent7: that the pate does not encourage numbness but it overrides Vespidae is wrong if the mezereon is not charitable. sent8: the indentation is charitable. sent9: if the mezereon is not tinny then it does not encourage numbness and is a Neapolitan. sent10: if the pate is charitable then the mezereon is Neapolitan. sent11: the pate overrides Vespidae and it is tinny if the mezereon does not encourage numbness. sent12: if the fact that that the reboxetine does not override Vespidae but it is tinny is right is wrong it does not brazen aluminum. sent13: if the mezereon does not encourage numbness but it is valent the fact that the pate is not a porker is not wrong. sent14: the fact that the indentation is not a porker but it is tinny is false. sent15: if the pate does not override Vespidae but it is a Neapolitan then the mezereon is not tinny. sent16: the fact that the mezereon is a porker hold. sent17: the fact that the pate is not a Neapolitan but it is a porker does not hold if it is not valent. sent18: if the pate does not override Vespidae the mezereon is both not a porker and charitable. sent19: something slugs Javanese if it is a porker. sent20: the fact that something is not charitable but it is a Neapolitan is not true if it is not a porker. sent21: the mezereon does not encourage numbness but it is valent if it does not override Vespidae. sent22: if the mezereon does encourage numbness then the fact that the reboxetine does not override Vespidae and is tinny is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mezereon overrides Vespidae.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the indentation is tinny.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the indentation is not tinny.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the mezereon does not override Vespidae hold.; int3 & sent21 -> int4: the mezereon does not encourage numbness but it is valent.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the pate is not a porker.; sent20 -> int6: if the pate is not a kind of a porker the fact that it is both not charitable and not non-Neapolitan is incorrect.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the pate is both not charitable and a Neapolitan does not hold.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__