the fact that if the twin is not equivocal then the twin is a clout does not hold.
sent1: that the twin is both nasopharyngeal and not bibliopolic does not hold if it is not equivocal. sent2: if the fact that the twin is equivocal is right then it is a clout. sent3: if that the twin is not equivocal hold the fact that it is nasopharyngeal thing that is bibliopolic is not right. sent4: something is documentary if the fact that it does scram apparel and it is not a centrex is not true. sent5: something is a clout if that it is nasopharyngeal but not bibliopolic is wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the twin is not equivocal.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: that the twin is both nasopharyngeal and not bibliopolic is wrong.; sent5 -> int2: if the fact that the twin is both nasopharyngeal and not bibliopolic does not hold it does clout.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the twin is a clout.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the twin is not equivocal then the twin is a clout does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the twin is both nasopharyngeal and not bibliopolic does not hold if it is not equivocal. sent2: if the fact that the twin is equivocal is right then it is a clout. sent3: if that the twin is not equivocal hold the fact that it is nasopharyngeal thing that is bibliopolic is not right. sent4: something is documentary if the fact that it does scram apparel and it is not a centrex is not true. sent5: something is a clout if that it is nasopharyngeal but not bibliopolic is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the twin is not equivocal.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: that the twin is both nasopharyngeal and not bibliopolic is wrong.; sent5 -> int2: if the fact that the twin is both nasopharyngeal and not bibliopolic does not hold it does clout.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the twin is a clout.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__