the sawyer is not tracheal.
sent1: that something is a kind of propitious thing that does not deduce pedal does not hold if it is not tracheal. sent2: the hotspot is a cohort. sent3: the sawyer is unpropitious and/or not nonindulgent if that it is not a Urmia is true. sent4: if the fact that the tracery does not skim diapir and it does not deduce solvability is wrong then the specimen is nonindulgent. sent5: the specimen is nonindulgent if the tracery skims diapir. sent6: that the tracery does not skim diapir and it does not deduce solvability is wrong if the sawyer is not tracheal. sent7: the hotspot is either unpropitious or not a Urmia or both if it is a cohort. sent8: if the fact that the tracery is a kind of a Urmia or is not a cricketer or both is not true the sawyer is not a kind of a Urmia. sent9: if the hotspot is unpropitious the fact that the specimen is not nonindulgent is true. sent10: the specimen is not nonindulgent if the hotspot is not a Urmia. sent11: the tracery is a cohort if the fact that it does not skim tired and is not a kind of a cohort is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sawyer is not tracheal.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: that the tracery does not skim diapir and it does not deduce solvability is wrong.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the specimen is nonindulgent is correct.; sent7 & sent2 -> int3: the hotspot is unpropitious and/or is not a kind of a Urmia.; int3 & sent9 & sent10 -> int4: the specimen is not nonindulgent.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the sawyer is not tracheal.
$hypothesis$ = the sawyer is not tracheal. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is a kind of propitious thing that does not deduce pedal does not hold if it is not tracheal. sent2: the hotspot is a cohort. sent3: the sawyer is unpropitious and/or not nonindulgent if that it is not a Urmia is true. sent4: if the fact that the tracery does not skim diapir and it does not deduce solvability is wrong then the specimen is nonindulgent. sent5: the specimen is nonindulgent if the tracery skims diapir. sent6: that the tracery does not skim diapir and it does not deduce solvability is wrong if the sawyer is not tracheal. sent7: the hotspot is either unpropitious or not a Urmia or both if it is a cohort. sent8: if the fact that the tracery is a kind of a Urmia or is not a cricketer or both is not true the sawyer is not a kind of a Urmia. sent9: if the hotspot is unpropitious the fact that the specimen is not nonindulgent is true. sent10: the specimen is not nonindulgent if the hotspot is not a Urmia. sent11: the tracery is a cohort if the fact that it does not skim tired and is not a kind of a cohort is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sawyer is not tracheal.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: that the tracery does not skim diapir and it does not deduce solvability is wrong.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the specimen is nonindulgent is correct.; sent7 & sent2 -> int3: the hotspot is unpropitious and/or is not a kind of a Urmia.; int3 & sent9 & sent10 -> int4: the specimen is not nonindulgent.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__