the fact that the fact that the fact that the patchwork is a skinny-dip and is not algoid is not incorrect does not hold if the treat is a kind of a Taoist is not correct.
sent1: the treat is a Taoist if the fact that it does not maraud and is not a kind of a digestive is not true. sent2: the fact that that the treat is algoid and is not a kind of a Taoist does not hold is true. sent3: if something that marauds is mousy it is not a kind of a skinny-dip. sent4: that the treat does not maraud and is not digestive is not true if the patchwork is not mousy. sent5: something is not non-mousy if it is Taoist. sent6: the fact that if the treat is Taoist then the patchwork skinny-dips but it is not algoid is right. sent7: the fact that something is not a Taoist is not wrong if it marauds. sent8: the patchwork is a Taoist if the fact that the treat does accredit slippage but it does not fill crocket is not true. sent9: that the treat accredits slippage and does not fill crocket does not hold if it is forte. sent10: if the treat marauds then it is not a Taoist. sent11: the serratus is a skinny-dip. sent12: if the treat does propose complicatedness it is forte. sent13: if the fact that something does not maraud and is not a kind of a digestive is not correct it is a Taoist. sent14: if the patchwork skinny-dips and is not algoid it is non-mousy. sent15: the fact that the treat does maraud and is not a kind of a digestive does not hold. sent16: that that the patchwork is both a skinny-dip and algoid is true is false if the treat is a Taoist. sent17: if the treat does skinny-dip then the fact that the patchwork does maraud and is not a kind of a Taoist is wrong. sent18: the patchwork does skinny-dip. sent19: something is not Taoist if that it does not maraud and it is not digestive is not true. sent20: the treat does not maraud if the fact that it is not a kind of a skinny-dip and it is not a Taoist is incorrect. sent21: the effervescence is mousy if the patchwork is mousy.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the patchwork is a skinny-dip that is not algoid.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the patchwork is not mousy.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the treat does not maraud and is not a digestive is false.; sent19 -> int3: if that the treat does not maraud and it is not a digestive is not true it is not a Taoist.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the treat is not a Taoist.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the treat is a Taoist.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the patchwork is a skinny-dip and not algoid is false.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the effervescence is not a kind of a skinny-dip.
sent3 -> int7: if the effervescence marauds and is mousy it does not skinny-dip.; sent5 -> int8: if the patchwork is a kind of a Taoist then it is mousy.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the fact that the patchwork is a skinny-dip and is not algoid is not incorrect does not hold if the treat is a kind of a Taoist is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the treat is a Taoist if the fact that it does not maraud and is not a kind of a digestive is not true. sent2: the fact that that the treat is algoid and is not a kind of a Taoist does not hold is true. sent3: if something that marauds is mousy it is not a kind of a skinny-dip. sent4: that the treat does not maraud and is not digestive is not true if the patchwork is not mousy. sent5: something is not non-mousy if it is Taoist. sent6: the fact that if the treat is Taoist then the patchwork skinny-dips but it is not algoid is right. sent7: the fact that something is not a Taoist is not wrong if it marauds. sent8: the patchwork is a Taoist if the fact that the treat does accredit slippage but it does not fill crocket is not true. sent9: that the treat accredits slippage and does not fill crocket does not hold if it is forte. sent10: if the treat marauds then it is not a Taoist. sent11: the serratus is a skinny-dip. sent12: if the treat does propose complicatedness it is forte. sent13: if the fact that something does not maraud and is not a kind of a digestive is not correct it is a Taoist. sent14: if the patchwork skinny-dips and is not algoid it is non-mousy. sent15: the fact that the treat does maraud and is not a kind of a digestive does not hold. sent16: that that the patchwork is both a skinny-dip and algoid is true is false if the treat is a Taoist. sent17: if the treat does skinny-dip then the fact that the patchwork does maraud and is not a kind of a Taoist is wrong. sent18: the patchwork does skinny-dip. sent19: something is not Taoist if that it does not maraud and it is not digestive is not true. sent20: the treat does not maraud if the fact that it is not a kind of a skinny-dip and it is not a Taoist is incorrect. sent21: the effervescence is mousy if the patchwork is mousy. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the patchwork is a skinny-dip that is not algoid.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the patchwork is not mousy.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the treat does not maraud and is not a digestive is false.; sent19 -> int3: if that the treat does not maraud and it is not a digestive is not true it is not a Taoist.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the treat is not a Taoist.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the treat is a Taoist.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the patchwork is a skinny-dip and not algoid is false.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__