the racetrack does not eliminate repertory.
sent1: the fact that the XXY is not chiasmal but it is a phrenology is not true if the fact that it is not Biedermeier hold. sent2: the XXY culminates. sent3: the XXY is not a seance but it is chiasmal. sent4: the XXY is not endoergic and/or is not a substantive if that the vanity does culminate is true. sent5: if the fact that something is Biedermeier and it does eliminate repertory is wrong then it does not eliminate repertory. sent6: that something is non-Huxleyan and chiasmal does not hold if it does not culminate. sent7: if the racetrack culminates and it is a de-escalation it is not Huxleyan. sent8: if something is not a kind of a seance but it is chiasmal then it is not a kind of a phrenology. sent9: the racetrack does not culminate but it is a de-escalation if the scandalmonger is not Biedermeier. sent10: the racetrack is not a substantive. sent11: the fact that the XXY is endoergic and it is substantive is not correct. sent12: the scandalmonger is Huxleyan if it is Biedermeier. sent13: that the racetrack does not eliminate repertory but it is a kind of a substantive does not hold if it is not Huxleyan. sent14: the XXY is non-endoergic thing that is a substantive if there is something such that it is Huxleyan. sent15: if the racetrack is non-substantive a de-escalation then it does not culminate. sent16: if something is a de-escalation it eliminates repertory. sent17: the racetrack is not chiasmal. sent18: the XXY is Biedermeier. sent19: if the XXY is not a de-escalation the racetrack is not a phrenology but it eliminates repertory. sent20: if the detainee is a seance it is not a de-escalation or is not a phrenology or both. sent21: the environment is not a kind of a substantive. sent22: if something is not endoergic it is Huxleyan and/or it is not Biedermeier. sent23: that something is both non-endoergic and not non-substantive is false if it is not a phrenology.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scandalmonger is Biedermeier.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the scandalmonger is Huxleyan.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is Huxleyan is true.; int2 & sent14 -> int3: the XXY is not endoergic but it is substantive.; sent23 -> int4: if the fact that the XXY is not a kind of a phrenology is true then the fact that it is not endoergic and is a substantive does not hold.; sent8 -> int5: the XXY is not a phrenology if it is not a seance and is chiasmal.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the XXY is not a phrenology.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the XXY is not endoergic and not non-substantive is false.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the scandalmonger is not Biedermeier.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the racetrack does not culminate and is a kind of a de-escalation.; int10 -> int11: the fact that the racetrack is a de-escalation is correct.; sent16 -> int12: the racetrack eliminates repertory if it is a de-escalation.; int11 & int12 -> hypothesis;
the racetrack does not eliminate repertory.
sent22 -> int13: if the scandalmonger is not endoergic it is Huxleyan and/or it is not Biedermeier.;
$hypothesis$ = the racetrack does not eliminate repertory. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the XXY is not chiasmal but it is a phrenology is not true if the fact that it is not Biedermeier hold. sent2: the XXY culminates. sent3: the XXY is not a seance but it is chiasmal. sent4: the XXY is not endoergic and/or is not a substantive if that the vanity does culminate is true. sent5: if the fact that something is Biedermeier and it does eliminate repertory is wrong then it does not eliminate repertory. sent6: that something is non-Huxleyan and chiasmal does not hold if it does not culminate. sent7: if the racetrack culminates and it is a de-escalation it is not Huxleyan. sent8: if something is not a kind of a seance but it is chiasmal then it is not a kind of a phrenology. sent9: the racetrack does not culminate but it is a de-escalation if the scandalmonger is not Biedermeier. sent10: the racetrack is not a substantive. sent11: the fact that the XXY is endoergic and it is substantive is not correct. sent12: the scandalmonger is Huxleyan if it is Biedermeier. sent13: that the racetrack does not eliminate repertory but it is a kind of a substantive does not hold if it is not Huxleyan. sent14: the XXY is non-endoergic thing that is a substantive if there is something such that it is Huxleyan. sent15: if the racetrack is non-substantive a de-escalation then it does not culminate. sent16: if something is a de-escalation it eliminates repertory. sent17: the racetrack is not chiasmal. sent18: the XXY is Biedermeier. sent19: if the XXY is not a de-escalation the racetrack is not a phrenology but it eliminates repertory. sent20: if the detainee is a seance it is not a de-escalation or is not a phrenology or both. sent21: the environment is not a kind of a substantive. sent22: if something is not endoergic it is Huxleyan and/or it is not Biedermeier. sent23: that something is both non-endoergic and not non-substantive is false if it is not a phrenology. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scandalmonger is Biedermeier.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the scandalmonger is Huxleyan.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is Huxleyan is true.; int2 & sent14 -> int3: the XXY is not endoergic but it is substantive.; sent23 -> int4: if the fact that the XXY is not a kind of a phrenology is true then the fact that it is not endoergic and is a substantive does not hold.; sent8 -> int5: the XXY is not a phrenology if it is not a seance and is chiasmal.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the XXY is not a phrenology.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the XXY is not endoergic and not non-substantive is false.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the scandalmonger is not Biedermeier.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the racetrack does not culminate and is a kind of a de-escalation.; int10 -> int11: the fact that the racetrack is a de-escalation is correct.; sent16 -> int12: the racetrack eliminates repertory if it is a de-escalation.; int11 & int12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__