the fact that that the carpophore is not a Vali but it is a u-turn is not right if the kumquat is a falls is wrong.
sent1: the fact that the carpophore is a kind of a Vali and it is a u-turn is incorrect. sent2: if the finback is a kind of a rugulah the coccus is anagrammatic. sent3: if that the finback is anagrammatic hold the kumquat is a kind of a rugulah. sent4: if the kumquat is a kind of a falls and is a kind of a rugulah the carpophore does not abjure recombinant. sent5: that the carpophore is a falls that abjures recombinant is not true if the kumquat is a kind of a rugulah. sent6: if the carpophore does not abjure recombinant then that it is a Vali that is a u-turn is not right. sent7: the fact that the carpophore is not a Vali but it is a u-turn is wrong if it does not abjure recombinant. sent8: the finback is anagrammatic. sent9: the kumquat is not a Vali but it is a falls. sent10: the kumquat is insurrectional and a u-turn.
sent3 & sent8 -> int1: the kumquat is a kind of a rugulah.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kumquat is a falls.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the kumquat does fall and is a rugulah.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: that the carpophore does not abjure recombinant is not wrong.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: that the carpophore is not a kind of a Vali but it is a u-turn is incorrect.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the coccus is anagrammatic.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the carpophore is not a Vali but it is a u-turn is not right if the kumquat is a falls is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the carpophore is a kind of a Vali and it is a u-turn is incorrect. sent2: if the finback is a kind of a rugulah the coccus is anagrammatic. sent3: if that the finback is anagrammatic hold the kumquat is a kind of a rugulah. sent4: if the kumquat is a kind of a falls and is a kind of a rugulah the carpophore does not abjure recombinant. sent5: that the carpophore is a falls that abjures recombinant is not true if the kumquat is a kind of a rugulah. sent6: if the carpophore does not abjure recombinant then that it is a Vali that is a u-turn is not right. sent7: the fact that the carpophore is not a Vali but it is a u-turn is wrong if it does not abjure recombinant. sent8: the finback is anagrammatic. sent9: the kumquat is not a Vali but it is a falls. sent10: the kumquat is insurrectional and a u-turn. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 & sent8 -> int1: the kumquat is a kind of a rugulah.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kumquat is a falls.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the kumquat does fall and is a rugulah.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: that the carpophore does not abjure recombinant is not wrong.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: that the carpophore is not a kind of a Vali but it is a u-turn is incorrect.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__