the fact that the Cornish is macrobiotic and/or a cactus if the Visayan does not flabbergast Bounty is not correct.
sent1: if the Cornish is a stigmatic either the Dipper is macrobiotic or it is not non-viviparous or both. sent2: if there is something such that that it is macrobiotic and is a kind of a cactus is false the Cornish is viviparous. sent3: the pyrostat is a stigmatic. sent4: the Visayan is a stigmatic if the Cornish flabbergasts Bounty. sent5: if the Dipper is viviparous then the Visayan flabbergasts Bounty. sent6: that the Cornish is a kind of a Presbyterian that is a stigmatic is wrong if it is not a cactus. sent7: if the Visayan is macrobiotic that it flabbergasts Bounty and is a stigmatic is not right. sent8: the Dipper is viviparous if there exists something such that that it is a Presbyterian that is stigmatic is wrong. sent9: the Cornish is a frontier. sent10: there exists something such that it is a Presbyterian and not non-stigmatic. sent11: that the Cornish is a Presbyterian and is a stigmatic is wrong if it is a cactus. sent12: that the Dipper is viviparous is correct if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a stigmatic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the Cornish is not a cactus is not wrong.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: that the Cornish is a Presbyterian that is a stigmatic does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is a Presbyterian that is a stigmatic is incorrect.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the Dipper is viviparous.; sent5 & int3 -> int4: the Visayan does flabbergast Bounty.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Visayan does not flabbergast Bounty.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the Cornish is a cactus.; int6 -> int7: the Cornish is not non-macrobiotic and/or it is a kind of a cactus.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Cornish is macrobiotic and/or a cactus if the Visayan does not flabbergast Bounty is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Cornish is a stigmatic either the Dipper is macrobiotic or it is not non-viviparous or both. sent2: if there is something such that that it is macrobiotic and is a kind of a cactus is false the Cornish is viviparous. sent3: the pyrostat is a stigmatic. sent4: the Visayan is a stigmatic if the Cornish flabbergasts Bounty. sent5: if the Dipper is viviparous then the Visayan flabbergasts Bounty. sent6: that the Cornish is a kind of a Presbyterian that is a stigmatic is wrong if it is not a cactus. sent7: if the Visayan is macrobiotic that it flabbergasts Bounty and is a stigmatic is not right. sent8: the Dipper is viviparous if there exists something such that that it is a Presbyterian that is stigmatic is wrong. sent9: the Cornish is a frontier. sent10: there exists something such that it is a Presbyterian and not non-stigmatic. sent11: that the Cornish is a Presbyterian and is a stigmatic is wrong if it is a cactus. sent12: that the Dipper is viviparous is correct if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a stigmatic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the Cornish is not a cactus is not wrong.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: that the Cornish is a Presbyterian that is a stigmatic does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is a Presbyterian that is a stigmatic is incorrect.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the Dipper is viviparous.; sent5 & int3 -> int4: the Visayan does flabbergast Bounty.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Visayan does not flabbergast Bounty.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the Cornish is a cactus.; int6 -> int7: the Cornish is not non-macrobiotic and/or it is a kind of a cactus.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__