the Jeffersonian is not a kind of a guttersnipe.
sent1: the Jeffersonian is a cuneiform. sent2: the Jeffersonian zaps. sent3: the cryptogam is philosophical and cuneiform. sent4: the handbow is not scopal if the cryptogam is perceptible and is philosophical. sent5: that the handbow is a cuneiform is not false. sent6: if something is not non-scopal that it is perceptible or it is not philosophical or both is not correct. sent7: the wrist is a kind of a solipsism. sent8: if the cryptogam is a kind of a solipsism that it is perceptible is not false. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of a solipsism but it is not a cuneiform is wrong it is a cuneiform. sent10: the fact that the fact that the handbow is not scopal and it is not a zap hold does not hold. sent11: if that the handbow is unrespectable is true then the cryptogam is a zap. sent12: if that the handbow is not perceptible is true that the cryptogam is a solipsism but it is not a cuneiform does not hold. sent13: the windfall is cuneiform if the cryptogam is not cuneiform. sent14: something is not a guttersnipe if it is not a solipsism. sent15: the handbow is scopal if that it is a kind of scopal thing that does not zap is not right. sent16: if the cryptogam is not a solipsism then the Jeffersonian is a guttersnipe. sent17: that the handbow is not a kind of a zap and is not philosophical is false. sent18: if the cryptogam is a zap the fact that it is a cuneiform hold. sent19: the handbow either is unrespectable or is a kind of a Phasianus or both.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cryptogam is a solipsism.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the cryptogam is perceptible.; sent3 -> int2: the cryptogam is philosophical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the cryptogam is perceptible and is philosophical.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the handbow is not scopal.; sent15 & sent10 -> int5: the handbow is scopal.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the cryptogam is not a solipsism.; int7 & sent16 -> hypothesis;
the windfall is cuneiform.
sent9 -> int8: if that the cryptogam is a solipsism but it is not a cuneiform is not true the fact that it is a cuneiform is not incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = the Jeffersonian is not a kind of a guttersnipe. ; $context$ = sent1: the Jeffersonian is a cuneiform. sent2: the Jeffersonian zaps. sent3: the cryptogam is philosophical and cuneiform. sent4: the handbow is not scopal if the cryptogam is perceptible and is philosophical. sent5: that the handbow is a cuneiform is not false. sent6: if something is not non-scopal that it is perceptible or it is not philosophical or both is not correct. sent7: the wrist is a kind of a solipsism. sent8: if the cryptogam is a kind of a solipsism that it is perceptible is not false. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of a solipsism but it is not a cuneiform is wrong it is a cuneiform. sent10: the fact that the fact that the handbow is not scopal and it is not a zap hold does not hold. sent11: if that the handbow is unrespectable is true then the cryptogam is a zap. sent12: if that the handbow is not perceptible is true that the cryptogam is a solipsism but it is not a cuneiform does not hold. sent13: the windfall is cuneiform if the cryptogam is not cuneiform. sent14: something is not a guttersnipe if it is not a solipsism. sent15: the handbow is scopal if that it is a kind of scopal thing that does not zap is not right. sent16: if the cryptogam is not a solipsism then the Jeffersonian is a guttersnipe. sent17: that the handbow is not a kind of a zap and is not philosophical is false. sent18: if the cryptogam is a zap the fact that it is a cuneiform hold. sent19: the handbow either is unrespectable or is a kind of a Phasianus or both. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cryptogam is a solipsism.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the cryptogam is perceptible.; sent3 -> int2: the cryptogam is philosophical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the cryptogam is perceptible and is philosophical.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the handbow is not scopal.; sent15 & sent10 -> int5: the handbow is scopal.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the cryptogam is not a solipsism.; int7 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__