that that the barricade is volcanic and aponeurotic does not hold hold.
sent1: the barricade is not shamanist if the fact that it is not cataplastic is right. sent2: the germ groups Dijon if the barricade ripostes and is non-volcanic. sent3: if there exists something such that it groups Botrychium that the barricade does not pour adductor and overturns tide is not true. sent4: if the barricade is not cataplastic then it is aponeurotic and it is not shamanist. sent5: The Dijon does not group germ. sent6: the germ does not group Botrychium if the adductor is neocortical but it does not overturn tide. sent7: the barricade is not shamanist. sent8: there is something such that it does group Botrychium. sent9: if the barricade is neocortical it ripostes. sent10: that the adductor is a riposte that groups Dijon is incorrect if it is not volcanic. sent11: if that the barricade does not overturn tide is not incorrect then the fact that it is neocortical is right. sent12: the adductor does not riposte if that it is a riposte and it does group Dijon does not hold. sent13: the germ is a riposte if the fact that it does not overturn tide and it does group Dijon is not right. sent14: the barricade is not cataplastic. sent15: that the barricade barbarizes lusterware if the germ does pour adductor and does not barbarizes lusterware is right. sent16: that something is neocortical is not wrong if it does not overturn tide. sent17: if the sauerbraten is aponeurotic then the adductor is not volcanic. sent18: the germ does not group Dijon. sent19: if the fact that something does not pour adductor but it overturns tide is wrong it is neocortical.
sent8 & sent3 -> int1: that the barricade does not pour adductor and overturns tide is not true.; sent19 -> int2: if the fact that the barricade does not pour adductor and overturns tide is not right it is neocortical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the barricade is neocortical.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the barricade ripostes.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the barricade is not volcanic.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: the barricade is a riposte but it is not volcanic.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the germ does group Dijon.; int6 & sent18 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the barricade is volcanic.; sent4 & sent14 -> int9: the barricade is aponeurotic thing that is not shamanist.; int9 -> int10: the barricade is aponeurotic.; int8 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the barricade does barbarize lusterware.
$hypothesis$ = that that the barricade is volcanic and aponeurotic does not hold hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the barricade is not shamanist if the fact that it is not cataplastic is right. sent2: the germ groups Dijon if the barricade ripostes and is non-volcanic. sent3: if there exists something such that it groups Botrychium that the barricade does not pour adductor and overturns tide is not true. sent4: if the barricade is not cataplastic then it is aponeurotic and it is not shamanist. sent5: The Dijon does not group germ. sent6: the germ does not group Botrychium if the adductor is neocortical but it does not overturn tide. sent7: the barricade is not shamanist. sent8: there is something such that it does group Botrychium. sent9: if the barricade is neocortical it ripostes. sent10: that the adductor is a riposte that groups Dijon is incorrect if it is not volcanic. sent11: if that the barricade does not overturn tide is not incorrect then the fact that it is neocortical is right. sent12: the adductor does not riposte if that it is a riposte and it does group Dijon does not hold. sent13: the germ is a riposte if the fact that it does not overturn tide and it does group Dijon is not right. sent14: the barricade is not cataplastic. sent15: that the barricade barbarizes lusterware if the germ does pour adductor and does not barbarizes lusterware is right. sent16: that something is neocortical is not wrong if it does not overturn tide. sent17: if the sauerbraten is aponeurotic then the adductor is not volcanic. sent18: the germ does not group Dijon. sent19: if the fact that something does not pour adductor but it overturns tide is wrong it is neocortical. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 & sent3 -> int1: that the barricade does not pour adductor and overturns tide is not true.; sent19 -> int2: if the fact that the barricade does not pour adductor and overturns tide is not right it is neocortical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the barricade is neocortical.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the barricade ripostes.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the barricade is not volcanic.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: the barricade is a riposte but it is not volcanic.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the germ does group Dijon.; int6 & sent18 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the barricade is volcanic.; sent4 & sent14 -> int9: the barricade is aponeurotic thing that is not shamanist.; int9 -> int10: the barricade is aponeurotic.; int8 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__