either the blubberer is Catholic or it does not stifle contemptuousness or both.
sent1: the acoustic is not cyprinid. sent2: the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation if it is a Filoviridae. sent3: if the nasturtium is imperial but not a fumigation then the blubberer is not an imperial. sent4: if the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation then that it is not a kind of an imperial and eulogizes Dagestani is wrong. sent5: if that something is not a fumigation and is not a kind of an imperial does not hold it is a fumigation. sent6: if that something is non-imperial thing that does eulogize Dagestani is not true then it does not eulogize Dagestani. sent7: something that either is a kind of a Catholic or does not stifle contemptuousness or both does eulogize Dagestani. sent8: if the cryoscope does eulogize Dagestani the nasturtium eulogize Dagestani. sent9: something that is an imperial or does not eulogize Dagestani or both is a fumigation. sent10: if the fact that the acoustic is not cyprinid is true then it is stylish and stagnates. sent11: if something is not a kind of an imperial it is a kind of a Catholic or it does not stifle contemptuousness or both. sent12: the blubberer does stifle scan if it is a fumigation. sent13: if the nasturtium does not eulogize Dagestani then that the pharmaceutical is not a fumigation and it is not a kind of an imperial is not correct. sent14: that something does not eulogize Dagestani and is not politic does not hold if it stagnates. sent15: the fact that the anaglyphy does not eulogize Dagestani is right. sent16: the blubberer is a kind of an imperial if it is a kind of a Ledum. sent17: the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation. sent18: if the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation then it does eulogize squinch. sent19: the blubberer is not a Catholic. sent20: the chorizo is an imperial. sent21: the blubberer does stifle contemptuousness if it is a five or not a fluosilicate or both.
sent7 -> int1: the blubberer does eulogize Dagestani if either it is Catholic or it does not stifle contemptuousness or both.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blubberer either is Catholic or does not stifle contemptuousness or both.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the blubberer does eulogize Dagestani.; sent6 -> int3: the blubberer does not eulogize Dagestani if that it is non-imperial thing that does eulogize Dagestani does not hold.; sent4 & sent17 -> int4: the fact that the blubberer is non-imperial thing that eulogizes Dagestani is false.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the blubberer does not eulogize Dagestani.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the blubberer is a Catholic and/or it does not stifle contemptuousness.
sent11 -> int7: if the blubberer is not a kind of an imperial it is a kind of a Catholic and/or it does not stifle contemptuousness.; sent14 -> int8: the fact that the acoustic does not eulogize Dagestani and it is not politic is not correct if it stagnates.; sent10 & sent1 -> int9: the acoustic is stylish and does stagnate.; int9 -> int10: the acoustic does stagnate.; int8 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the acoustic does not eulogize Dagestani and it is not politic is not correct.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that the fact that it does not eulogize Dagestani and it is not politic does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = either the blubberer is Catholic or it does not stifle contemptuousness or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the acoustic is not cyprinid. sent2: the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation if it is a Filoviridae. sent3: if the nasturtium is imperial but not a fumigation then the blubberer is not an imperial. sent4: if the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation then that it is not a kind of an imperial and eulogizes Dagestani is wrong. sent5: if that something is not a fumigation and is not a kind of an imperial does not hold it is a fumigation. sent6: if that something is non-imperial thing that does eulogize Dagestani is not true then it does not eulogize Dagestani. sent7: something that either is a kind of a Catholic or does not stifle contemptuousness or both does eulogize Dagestani. sent8: if the cryoscope does eulogize Dagestani the nasturtium eulogize Dagestani. sent9: something that is an imperial or does not eulogize Dagestani or both is a fumigation. sent10: if the fact that the acoustic is not cyprinid is true then it is stylish and stagnates. sent11: if something is not a kind of an imperial it is a kind of a Catholic or it does not stifle contemptuousness or both. sent12: the blubberer does stifle scan if it is a fumigation. sent13: if the nasturtium does not eulogize Dagestani then that the pharmaceutical is not a fumigation and it is not a kind of an imperial is not correct. sent14: that something does not eulogize Dagestani and is not politic does not hold if it stagnates. sent15: the fact that the anaglyphy does not eulogize Dagestani is right. sent16: the blubberer is a kind of an imperial if it is a kind of a Ledum. sent17: the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation. sent18: if the blubberer is a kind of a fumigation then it does eulogize squinch. sent19: the blubberer is not a Catholic. sent20: the chorizo is an imperial. sent21: the blubberer does stifle contemptuousness if it is a five or not a fluosilicate or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: the blubberer does eulogize Dagestani if either it is Catholic or it does not stifle contemptuousness or both.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blubberer either is Catholic or does not stifle contemptuousness or both.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the blubberer does eulogize Dagestani.; sent6 -> int3: the blubberer does not eulogize Dagestani if that it is non-imperial thing that does eulogize Dagestani does not hold.; sent4 & sent17 -> int4: the fact that the blubberer is non-imperial thing that eulogizes Dagestani is false.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the blubberer does not eulogize Dagestani.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__