the fact that if the fact that the bairn gripes apposition is not wrong then the mycophagy is both not electronic and not a Icarus is not right.
sent1: if the fact that the mycophagy is not electronic and it is not a Icarus does not hold the bairn does not gripe apposition. sent2: if the fact that the bairn is not a Icarus and it is not electronic is not right then the mycophagy does not gripe apposition. sent3: the mycophagy is not electronic and it does not gripe apposition if the bairn is a Icarus. sent4: the mycophagy is a Icarus. sent5: the mycophagy is non-electronic but it is a Icarus. sent6: the mycophagy is not a balance. sent7: if the mycophagy is a kind of non-electronic thing that is not a Icarus the bairn does not gripe apposition. sent8: the bairn is not a Icarus if that the mycophagy is not electronic and it does not gripe apposition is not right. sent9: the bairn is not a Icarus and is not electronic if the mycophagy does gripe apposition. sent10: that the mycophagy is electronic thing that is not a kind of a Icarus is not right. sent11: the mycophagy is non-electronic thing that does not gripe apposition. sent12: the gat is not a kind of a Icarus. sent13: if that the mycophagy is not electronic but it is a Icarus is incorrect then the bairn does not gripe apposition. sent14: if that that the bairn is not electronic and is not a Icarus hold is false the fact that the mycophagy does not gripe apposition is not wrong. sent15: the mycophagy does not gripe apposition and it is not electronic. sent16: the bairn is a Icarus. sent17: if the fact that the bairn does gripe apposition is correct the mycophagy is both not electronic and a Icarus. sent18: the mycophagy is not electronic if the bairn gripes apposition. sent19: if the mycophagy is electronic the bairn does not gripe apposition.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the mycophagy is not electronic and it is not a Icarus does not hold.; sent1 & assump2 -> int1: the bairn does not gripe apposition.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bairn does gripe apposition.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the mycophagy is both not electronic and not a Icarus.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the fact that the bairn gripes apposition is not wrong then the mycophagy is both not electronic and not a Icarus is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the mycophagy is not electronic and it is not a Icarus does not hold the bairn does not gripe apposition. sent2: if the fact that the bairn is not a Icarus and it is not electronic is not right then the mycophagy does not gripe apposition. sent3: the mycophagy is not electronic and it does not gripe apposition if the bairn is a Icarus. sent4: the mycophagy is a Icarus. sent5: the mycophagy is non-electronic but it is a Icarus. sent6: the mycophagy is not a balance. sent7: if the mycophagy is a kind of non-electronic thing that is not a Icarus the bairn does not gripe apposition. sent8: the bairn is not a Icarus if that the mycophagy is not electronic and it does not gripe apposition is not right. sent9: the bairn is not a Icarus and is not electronic if the mycophagy does gripe apposition. sent10: that the mycophagy is electronic thing that is not a kind of a Icarus is not right. sent11: the mycophagy is non-electronic thing that does not gripe apposition. sent12: the gat is not a kind of a Icarus. sent13: if that the mycophagy is not electronic but it is a Icarus is incorrect then the bairn does not gripe apposition. sent14: if that that the bairn is not electronic and is not a Icarus hold is false the fact that the mycophagy does not gripe apposition is not wrong. sent15: the mycophagy does not gripe apposition and it is not electronic. sent16: the bairn is a Icarus. sent17: if the fact that the bairn does gripe apposition is correct the mycophagy is both not electronic and a Icarus. sent18: the mycophagy is not electronic if the bairn gripes apposition. sent19: if the mycophagy is electronic the bairn does not gripe apposition. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the mycophagy is not electronic and it is not a Icarus does not hold.; sent1 & assump2 -> int1: the bairn does not gripe apposition.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bairn does gripe apposition.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the mycophagy is both not electronic and not a Icarus.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__