the fact that the Clorox is a monotheist hold.
sent1: if the bend does not declaw carousel then the fact that it deactivates Charadriidae and worsts is not correct. sent2: the Clorox does declaw carousel if there is something such that it is a kind of a monotheist. sent3: That the carousel does not declaw bend hold. sent4: the bend is not a Eriophorum if there exists something such that the fact that it is a Eriophorum and it is Dantean does not hold. sent5: that the bend does not declaw carousel hold. sent6: if something is a monotheist the fact that it is not a kind of a particularism and it does cascade pyrolusite is not correct. sent7: that the canecutter does not deactivate Charadriidae is right if there exists something such that the fact that it does deactivate Charadriidae and is a kind of a worst does not hold. sent8: if something does not worst and does not deactivate peace it does not declaw carousel. sent9: if the canecutter does not declaw carousel then the Clorox is a monotheist and it does deactivate Charadriidae. sent10: if the Clorox is a monotheist the fact that it is a kind of a particularism and it cascades pyrolusite is not true. sent11: if there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is not a particularism and it cascades pyrolusite is not incorrect is wrong the canecutter does deactivate Charadriidae. sent12: the fact that something is not a cut-in and is a monotheist is not right if it confederates dashing.
sent6 -> int1: that the Clorox is not a particularism but it cascades pyrolusite is false if it is a monotheist.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Clorox is a monotheist.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the Clorox is not a particularism but it cascades pyrolusite does not hold.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that that it is not a particularism and it does cascade pyrolusite is not right.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: that the canecutter deactivates Charadriidae is not incorrect.; sent1 & sent5 -> int5: the fact that the bend does deactivate Charadriidae and it is a worst does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that the fact that it deactivates Charadriidae and is a worst is incorrect.; int6 & sent7 -> int7: the canecutter does not deactivate Charadriidae.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
the Clorox is a monotheist.
sent8 -> int9: the canecutter does not declaw carousel if it is not a worst and it does not deactivate peace.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Clorox is a monotheist hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bend does not declaw carousel then the fact that it deactivates Charadriidae and worsts is not correct. sent2: the Clorox does declaw carousel if there is something such that it is a kind of a monotheist. sent3: That the carousel does not declaw bend hold. sent4: the bend is not a Eriophorum if there exists something such that the fact that it is a Eriophorum and it is Dantean does not hold. sent5: that the bend does not declaw carousel hold. sent6: if something is a monotheist the fact that it is not a kind of a particularism and it does cascade pyrolusite is not correct. sent7: that the canecutter does not deactivate Charadriidae is right if there exists something such that the fact that it does deactivate Charadriidae and is a kind of a worst does not hold. sent8: if something does not worst and does not deactivate peace it does not declaw carousel. sent9: if the canecutter does not declaw carousel then the Clorox is a monotheist and it does deactivate Charadriidae. sent10: if the Clorox is a monotheist the fact that it is a kind of a particularism and it cascades pyrolusite is not true. sent11: if there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is not a particularism and it cascades pyrolusite is not incorrect is wrong the canecutter does deactivate Charadriidae. sent12: the fact that something is not a cut-in and is a monotheist is not right if it confederates dashing. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: that the Clorox is not a particularism but it cascades pyrolusite is false if it is a monotheist.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Clorox is a monotheist.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the Clorox is not a particularism but it cascades pyrolusite does not hold.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that that it is not a particularism and it does cascade pyrolusite is not right.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: that the canecutter deactivates Charadriidae is not incorrect.; sent1 & sent5 -> int5: the fact that the bend does deactivate Charadriidae and it is a worst does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that the fact that it deactivates Charadriidae and is a worst is incorrect.; int6 & sent7 -> int7: the canecutter does not deactivate Charadriidae.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__