that there is something such that if it does not diffuse byway then it is not Anglophilic and it is nilpotent is not true.
sent1: something is polyvalent if it is a proenzyme. sent2: the fact that the paraquat is not Anglophilic is correct. sent3: the paraquat does not bathe. sent4: the bodybuilder is nilpotent. sent5: if the paraquat does diffuse byway then that it is nilpotent hold. sent6: something does bear if that it is inalienable is not wrong. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not diffuse byway then it is Anglophilic and it is nilpotent. sent8: something is nilpotent if it does not diffuse byway. sent9: the clergyman does not diffuse byway but it is least if it is Anglophilic. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not diffuse byway it is nilpotent. sent11: there is something such that if it does diffuse byway then it is both not Anglophilic and nilpotent. sent12: the paraquat is not non-Ethiopian. sent13: the peba is not a Meitner. sent14: if the fiance is nilpotent then it is not a maladjustment and does exploit. sent15: the paraquat does not debrief fallibility and is a siphonophore. sent16: the palate does not diffuse byway.
sent8 -> int1: if the fact that the paraquat does diffuse byway is wrong it is not non-nilpotent.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the paraquat does not diffuse byway.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the paraquat is nilpotent.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the paraquat is both non-Anglophilic and nilpotent.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: if the paraquat does not diffuse byway it is not Anglophilic and it is nilpotent.; int4 -> hypothesis;
the clergyman does not diffuse byway and is a least.
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it does not diffuse byway then it is not Anglophilic and it is nilpotent is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: something is polyvalent if it is a proenzyme. sent2: the fact that the paraquat is not Anglophilic is correct. sent3: the paraquat does not bathe. sent4: the bodybuilder is nilpotent. sent5: if the paraquat does diffuse byway then that it is nilpotent hold. sent6: something does bear if that it is inalienable is not wrong. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not diffuse byway then it is Anglophilic and it is nilpotent. sent8: something is nilpotent if it does not diffuse byway. sent9: the clergyman does not diffuse byway but it is least if it is Anglophilic. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not diffuse byway it is nilpotent. sent11: there is something such that if it does diffuse byway then it is both not Anglophilic and nilpotent. sent12: the paraquat is not non-Ethiopian. sent13: the peba is not a Meitner. sent14: if the fiance is nilpotent then it is not a maladjustment and does exploit. sent15: the paraquat does not debrief fallibility and is a siphonophore. sent16: the palate does not diffuse byway. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> int1: if the fact that the paraquat does diffuse byway is wrong it is not non-nilpotent.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the paraquat does not diffuse byway.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the paraquat is nilpotent.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the paraquat is both non-Anglophilic and nilpotent.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: if the paraquat does not diffuse byway it is not Anglophilic and it is nilpotent.; int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__