the dollarfish does not reposit dunk.
sent1: if that something does not appoint and is imponderable is not correct then it does not visit. sent2: there is something such that that it is not homemade and it does not appoint is false. sent3: if that something is homemade but it does not occidentalize sophisticated is wrong it is not homemade. sent4: if the fencer is not imponderable then the barrier is inextricable but it is not homemade. sent5: the fact that the barrier does not horripilate philosophy is not incorrect if there exists something such that that it does not visit and it does not reposit Areopagus is incorrect. sent6: that the cone occidentalizes guillotine but it is not sufficient is false. sent7: something is not inextricable and it does not reposit Areopagus. sent8: the cone does not reposit Areopagus if that it occidentalizes guillotine and is not sufficient is not correct. sent9: something that does not horripilate philosophy does not occidentalize sophisticated. sent10: that the cone does not visit and reposits Areopagus is not right. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it does visit and does not reposit Areopagus does not hold. sent12: if there exists something such that it reposits Areopagus then the barrier does not horripilate philosophy. sent13: the cone is a demur and does not reposit Areopagus. sent14: there is something such that that it is not a visit and it does reposit Areopagus is not right. sent15: that the dollarfish is imponderable and/or it does appoint is not true if the fact that the fencer is not homemade is not false. sent16: that the cone is not a visit and it does not reposit Areopagus is wrong. sent17: if the fencer is not a kind of an imponderable the barrier is not homemade. sent18: if the fact that something is an imponderable and/or appoints is false it does not reposit dunk. sent19: the barrier is not homemade. sent20: the fencer appoints but it is not an imponderable. sent21: if the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated but it is inextricable the dollarfish reposits dunk. sent22: the fact that the cone does horripilate philosophy and visits is not right if it does not reposit Areopagus. sent23: the fencer appoints.
sent20 -> int1: the fencer is not an imponderable.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the barrier is a kind of inextricable thing that is not homemade.; int2 -> int3: the barrier is inextricable.; sent9 -> int4: the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated if it does not horripilate philosophy.; sent16 -> int5: there exists something such that that it is not a visit and it does not reposit Areopagus is not correct.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the barrier does not horripilate philosophy.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated and is inextricable.; int8 & sent21 -> hypothesis;
the proboscidean is not a visit.
sent1 -> int9: if that the proboscidean does not appoint and is imponderable is incorrect then it does not visit.;
$hypothesis$ = the dollarfish does not reposit dunk. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something does not appoint and is imponderable is not correct then it does not visit. sent2: there is something such that that it is not homemade and it does not appoint is false. sent3: if that something is homemade but it does not occidentalize sophisticated is wrong it is not homemade. sent4: if the fencer is not imponderable then the barrier is inextricable but it is not homemade. sent5: the fact that the barrier does not horripilate philosophy is not incorrect if there exists something such that that it does not visit and it does not reposit Areopagus is incorrect. sent6: that the cone occidentalizes guillotine but it is not sufficient is false. sent7: something is not inextricable and it does not reposit Areopagus. sent8: the cone does not reposit Areopagus if that it occidentalizes guillotine and is not sufficient is not correct. sent9: something that does not horripilate philosophy does not occidentalize sophisticated. sent10: that the cone does not visit and reposits Areopagus is not right. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it does visit and does not reposit Areopagus does not hold. sent12: if there exists something such that it reposits Areopagus then the barrier does not horripilate philosophy. sent13: the cone is a demur and does not reposit Areopagus. sent14: there is something such that that it is not a visit and it does reposit Areopagus is not right. sent15: that the dollarfish is imponderable and/or it does appoint is not true if the fact that the fencer is not homemade is not false. sent16: that the cone is not a visit and it does not reposit Areopagus is wrong. sent17: if the fencer is not a kind of an imponderable the barrier is not homemade. sent18: if the fact that something is an imponderable and/or appoints is false it does not reposit dunk. sent19: the barrier is not homemade. sent20: the fencer appoints but it is not an imponderable. sent21: if the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated but it is inextricable the dollarfish reposits dunk. sent22: the fact that the cone does horripilate philosophy and visits is not right if it does not reposit Areopagus. sent23: the fencer appoints. ; $proof$ = 
sent20 -> int1: the fencer is not an imponderable.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the barrier is a kind of inextricable thing that is not homemade.; int2 -> int3: the barrier is inextricable.; sent9 -> int4: the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated if it does not horripilate philosophy.; sent16 -> int5: there exists something such that that it is not a visit and it does not reposit Areopagus is not correct.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the barrier does not horripilate philosophy.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the barrier does not occidentalize sophisticated and is inextricable.; int8 & sent21 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__